jfreefoom  an*  jFeUotosinp 
in  Religion 


^$-\9jo 


\ 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

GIFT    OF 

I 

Class 


frVHA. 


ML 


i 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

Microsoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/freedomfellowshiOOinterich 


>*    OF  THE 

f  UNIVERSITY 


FREEDOM  AND  FELLOWSHIP 
IN  RELIGION 

PROCEEDINGS   AND    PAPERS   OF  THE 

FOURTH    INTERNATIONAL    CONGRESS 
OF    RELIGIOUS    LIBERALS 

HELD    AT   BOSTON,    U.S.A.,  SEPTEMBER   22-27,   1907 

EDITED    BY 

CHARLES   W.  WENDTE 


"  Freedom  is  re-created  year  by  year 
By  hearts  wide  open  on  the  Godward  side." 

J.  R.  Lowell 


WITH  FIFTY-FIVE  PORTRAITS 


VBHA> 
OF 

UW'VE 


INTERNATIONAL  COUNCIL 
BOSTON,  MASS. 


>fen 


GEO.  H.  ELLIS  CO.,    rKINTEHS,   272  CONGRESS   ST.,    BOSTON,    U.S.A. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAG1T 

Table  of  Contents £ 

Foreword  . * 

Committee  of  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other 

Ldjeral  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers,  1907-10 4. 

Committee  of  the  Fourth  International  Congress  of  Religious 

Liberals,  in  Boston,  1907 5 

List  of  Honorary  Vice-Presidents  of  the  Boston  International 

Congress  of  Religious  Liberals 6 

List  of  Foreign  Delegates 9 

List  of  Associations  sending  Official  Delegates 13 

Program  of  the  Boston  International   Congress  of  Religious 

Ld3Erals,  September  22-27,  1907     18 

The  International  Congress  of  Religious  Ld3Erals  in  Boston,  1907,      25 
Opening  Exercises  of  the  International  Congress  at  Symphony 
Hall,  September  22,  8  p.m.  : 

Original  Hymn   by  Rev.  Frederick  L.  Hosmer,  D.D 31 

Original  Hymn  by  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe 32- 

Address,  "Glory  to  God!"  by  Rev.  Thomas  R.  Slicer,  D.D.     ...       33 
Address,  "Peace  on  Earth,"  by  Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D.    .       39 
Address,  "Good  Will  to  Men,"  by  Dr.  Booker  T.  Washington     .    .       43 
First  Session  of  the  International  Congress,  in  Tremont  Temple, 
September  24,  10  a.m.  : 

Original  Hymn  by  Rev.  Seth  Curtis  Beach,  D.D 47 

Address  of  the  President,  Rev.  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D.    .' 48 

Report  of  the  General  Secretary,  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte   ....       53 
Address,  "The  Unitarian  Movement  in  England,"  by  Rev.  W.  Cope- 
land  Bowie,  of  London,  England 66 

Address,     "The   Protestantenverein   of  Germany,"  by  Rev.  Max 

Fischer,  D.D.,  of  Berlin 76 

Address,  "  The  Situation  of  the  Churches  in  France  after  the  Separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State,"  by  Professor  Jean  Reville,  D.D.,  of 

Paris      89 

Second  Session  of  the  International  Congress,  in  Tremont  Temple, 
September  24,  2  p.m.  : 

Vice-President  Frederick  W.  Hamilton's  Address 98 

Address,  "  The  Religious  Situation  in  Germany,  and  the  Freunde  der 
Christliohen  Welt,"  by  Professor  Martin  Rade,  D.D.,  of  Mar- 
burg   xoo 


1] 

PAGE 

Address,  "The  Liberal  Outlook  in  Denmark  and  Norway,"  by  Mr. 

Theo.  Berg,  of  Copenhagen      115 

Address,  "The  Condition  of  Religious  Liberalism  in  Sweden,"  by 

Professor  O.  E.  Lindberg,  of  Gotheburg 124 

Address,  "Prospects  of  Religious  Liberalism  in  Australia,"  by  Rev. 

Charles  Strong,  D.D.,  of  Melbourne 130 

Address,  "Liberal  Religion  in  New  Zealand,"  by  Miss  Mary  E. 

Richmond,  of  Wellington 136 

Address,  "Liberal  Religion,"  by  Professor  Goldwin  Smith,  of  Canada,     139 
Third  Session  of  the  International  Congress,  in  Tremont  Temple, 

September  25,  10  a.m.  : 

Original  Hymn  by  Rev.  Benj.  R.  Bulkeley 141 

Address,  "The  Religious  Situation  in  Austria,"  by  Professor  Thomas 

G.  Masaryk,  of  Prague 142 

Address,"  The  Ideals  of  Hungary,"  by  Rev.  Nicolas  Jozan,  of  Budapest,     153 
Address,  "The  State  of  Religious  Liberalism  in  Holland,"  by  Professor 

H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  of  Leiden 165 

Address,  "Religious  Liberalism  in  Romance  Switzerland,"  by  Rev. 

Ernest  Rochat,  D.D.,  of  Geneva 173 

Address,  "The  Progress  of  Theology  in  Scotland,"  by  Rev.  Alexander 

Webster,  of  Aberdeen 184 

Fourth  Session  of  the  International  Congress,  in  the  Old  South 

Church,  September  25,  8  p.m.  : 

Religious  Services  by  Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D 190 

Address,  "Modernism  and  Modernists  in  Italy,"  by  Rev.  L.  E.  T. 

Andre,  D.D.,  of  Florence 200 

Address,   "The  Protestants  of  France,  their  Past  History  and  Pres- 
ent Condition,"  by  Professor   Gaston    Bonet-Maury,  D.D.,  of 

Paris 218 

Address,  "The  Crisis  in  the  Catholic  Church,"  by  Abbe"  A.  Houtin, 

of  Paris      232 

Fifth  and  Closing  Session  of  the  Boston  International  Congress, 

Sanders    Theatre,   Harvard    University,   September   26, 

10  a.m.  : 

Address  by  Hon.  John  D.  Long 240 

Address  of  Welcome  by  President  Charles  W.  Eliot,  LL.D 240 

Address,  "John  Calvin  and  the  Reformation  Monument  at  Geneva," 

by  Professor  Edouard  Montet,  D.D.,  of  Geneva.       ......     244 

Address,  "The  Tendency  of  Positive  Religions  to  Universal  Religion," 

by  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  D.D. ,  of  Berlin 255 

Text  of  Resolutions  offered  by  Rev.  Valentine  D.  Davis,  of  London, 

and  Dr.  J.  M.  Whiton  for  the  Committee 242,     253 

Addresses  Delivered  at  the  National  Conference  of  Unitarian 

and  Other  Christian  Churches,  Tremont  Temple,  Septem- 
ber 23,  Morning  and  Afternoon  : 


Ill 

PAGE 

Opening  Address,  "The  New  Comity  of  Nations,"  by  President  Car- 
roll D.  Wright,  of  Worcester,  Mass 274 

Address,  "The  Freedom  of  Churches  in  the  United  States  as  regards 
Property-holding  and  Self-government,"  by  President  Charles 
W.  Eliot,  LL.D.,  of  Cambridge,   Mass 281 

Address,  "The  Good  and  Evil  of  Denominationalism,"  by  Profes- 
sor Francis  A.  Christie,  of  Meadville,  Penn 291 

Address,  "  Faith  as  Affected  by  Freedom,"  by  Rev.  George  A.  Gordon, 

D.D.,  of  Boston,  Mass 301 

Address,  "Our  Free  Churches  in  Relation  to  Theological  Develop- 
ment," by  Professor  William  W.  Fenn,  D.D.,  of  Cambridge,  Mass.,     309 

Address,  "The  Separation  of  Church  and  State,"  by  Hon.  Marcus  P. 

Knowlton,  of  Fall  River,  Mass 317 

Address," The  Liberal  Outlook,"  by  Rev.  Paul  Revere  Frothingham, 

of  Boston 325 

The  Congress  Sermon,  preached  in  Arlington  Street  Church, 
September  24,  at  8  p.m.,  by  Rev.  John  Hunter,  D.D.,  of 
Glasgow,  Scotland 332 


DEPARTMENT    MEETINGS: 

I.  Department  of  Religious  History  and  Philosophy,  in  Pilgrim 

Hall,  Congregational  House,  September  24,  3.30  p.m.  : 
Address,  "A  Protestant   Declaration  of   Faith,"   by  Rev.  Gottfried 

Schoenholzer,  of  Zurich,  Switzerland 359 

Address,  "The  Relation  of  Christianity  to  Religion,"  by  Christopher 

J.  Street,  M.A.,  of  Sheffield,  England 368 

Discussion. 

Address,  "What  does  a  Free  Christianity  require  to  become  Vic- 
torious?" by  Professor  Rudolf  Eucken,  of  Jena,  Germany     .    .     379 
Address,  "  Remonstrantism  and  Remonstrants,"  by  Professor  H.  Y. 

Groenewegen,  D.D.,  of  Leiden,  Holland 390 

Address,  "Mennonitism  in  its  International  Relations,"  by  Rev.  F.  C. 

Fleischer,  of  Makkum,  Holland        398 

Address,  "The  Burden  and  Blessing  of  Tradition,"  by  Professor 

Martin  Rade,  D.D.,  of  Marburg 418 

II.  Department    of    Religious    Education,    en    King's    Chapel, 

September  24,  3.30  p.m.  : 
Opening  address  of  Rev.  Franklin  C.  Southworth,  of  Meadville,  Pa.,     442 
Address,  "The  New  Education,"  by  Rev.  Henry  F.  Cope,  of  Chicago,     445 
Address,   "The    Psychology  of    Conversion,"   by    Rev.    Philip    H. 

Hugenholtz,  Jr.,  of  Amsterdam,  Holland 456 

III.  Department  of  Press  and  Publication,  in  Unitarian  Build- 

ing, September  25,  4.30  p.m.  : 
Opening  Address  of  Rev.  Frederick  A.  Bisbee,  D.D.,  of  Boston,   .    .     464 


IV 

PAGE 

IV.  Department  of  Comity  and  Fellowship  : 

Opening  Remarks  of  Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  of  Chicago  ....  460 

Address,  Dr.  J.  M.  Whiton,  of  New  York 471 

Address  by  Henry  W.  Wilbur,  of  Philadelphia 474 

Address  by  Rev.  J.  B.  Weston,  D.D.,  of  Stanfordville,  N.Y 481 

Address  by  Rev.  Charles  F.  Carter,  of  Lexington,  Mass 484 

Address  by  Rev.  Charles  G.  Ames,  of  Boston 486 

Address  by  Rev.  Arthur  Heron,  of  London,  England 488 

Address  by  Rev.  W.  G.  Puddefoot,  of  Boston 491 

Closing  Remarks  by  Rev.  J.  L.  Jones 493 

V.  Department  of  Social  and  Public  Service,  Old  South  Meet- 

ing-house, September  25,  3.30  p.m.  : 
Opening  Remarks  by  Rev.  Joseph  H.  Crooker,  D.D.,  of  Boston  .    .     494 
Address,  "Religion  and  Social  Reform,"  by  Fred  Maddison,  M.P., 

of  London,  England 495 

Address,    "The  Ethical  Basis  of    Liberal   Christianity,"    by  Rev. 

Leonhard  Ragaz,  of  Basel,  Switzerland 502 

Address,  "The  World  War  with  Intoxicants,"  by  Rev.  William  G. 

Tarrant,  of  London,  England 510 

Address,  "Good  Will,"  by  Rev.  Charles  F.  Dole,  of  Boston  ....     521 

VI.  Department  of  Oriental  Religion,  in  Second  Church,  Sep- 

tember 25,  at  8  p.m.  : 

Religious  Service  by  Rabbi  Charles  Fleischer,  of  Boston 523 

Introductions  and  Remarks  by  Hon.  James  M.  Morton 524 

Address,  "Religious  Forces  of  Japan,"  by  Rev.  Saichiro  Kanda,  of 

Tokyo 525 

Address,  "The  Ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  of  India,"  by  Professor 

G.  SubbaRau,  of  Calicut 530 

Address,  "  Religious  Opportunities  in  India,"  by  Rev.  S.  L.  Joshi,  of 

Bombay 536 

Address,  "The  Liberal  Mohammedanism,"  by  M.  Barakatullah,  of 

Bhopal 542 

VII.  Department  of  Woman's  Work,  in  Ford  and  Channing  Halls, 

September  25,  3.30  p.m.  : 
Address,  "The  Postal  Mission  in  Holland,"  by  MissD.  Van  Eck,  of 

Leiden 547 

Remarks  of  Mrs.  R.  H.  Davis,  of  Boston 551 

Address  by  Rev.  Miss  Gertrude  von  Petzold,  of  Leicester,  England  .    .  551 

Remarks  by  Lady  Bowring,  of  Liverpool,  England      552 

Remarks  by  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond,  of  New  Zealand 552 

Remarks  by  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  of  Boston        55a 

Overflow  Meeting  in  Channing  Hall 552 

VIII.  Department  of  New  Americans,  en  Ford  Hall,  September  24, 

at  3.30  p.m.  : 
Opening  Remarks,  by  Rev.  Edward  E.  Hale,  D.D 553 


V 

PAGE 

Address  of  Rev.  Nicolas  Jozan,  of  Budapest,  Hungary 555 

Address  of  Rev.  L.  E.  T.  Andre\  of  Florence,  Italy 557 

Remarks  of  Dr.  Hale 560 

Address  of  Rev.  Francis  W.  Holden,  of  Milford,  N.H 561 

Address  of  Professor  Thomas  G.  Masaryk,  of  Prague,  Bohemia  .    .  563 

Address  of  Rev.  Amadeus  H.  Norman,  of  Hanska,  Minn 566 

Address  of  Senator  Hinds,  of  Mississippi 569 

Remarks  by  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe 570 

Address  of  Mr.  Meyer  Bloomfield,  of  Boston 572 

Closing  Remarks  by  Dr.  Hale 573 

Reception  of  the  Congress  at  Hotel  Somerset,  September  23,  at 

8  p.m 575 

Introductory  Remarks  by  President  S.  A.  Eliot,  D.D 576 

Address  of  Welcome  by  his  Excellency,  the  Governor  of  Massachu- 
setts, Hon.  Curtis  Guild,  Jr 576 

Response  by  Sir  William  Bowring,  of  England 579 

Introductions  of  Foreign  Delegates  by  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte      .  582 

Response  of  Professor  Otto  Pfieiderer,  of  Germany 583 

Response  of  Professor  Jean  Reville,  of  France 585 

Response  of  Professor  Meyboom,  of  Holland 587 

Response  of  Professor  Edouard  Montet,  of  Switzerland 588 

Response  of  Professor  S.  C.  K.  Rutnam,  of  Ceylon 591 

Supplementary  Reception  at  Channing  Hall 575 

The  Banquet 593 

Excursion  and  Neighborhood  Meetings 594 

Visit  at  West  Newton,  September  22,  p.m 594 

Cambridge  Day  Hospitalities,  September  26      595 

Pilgrimage  to  Concord,  September  23,  p.m 596 

Excursion  and  Proceedings  at  Plymouth,  September  27     ....  597 

Original  Hymn  by  Chas.  W.  Wendte      598 

Address  of  Welcome  by  Hon.  Arthur  Lord 598 

Response  by  President  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D 601 

Address  by  Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen 603 

Excursion  and  Proceedings  at  Hingham,  Mass.,  September  27, 

P.M 605 

Address  of  Welcome  by  Francis  H.  Lincoln 605 

Address  by  Rev.  Louis  C.  Cornish 606 

Excursion  and  Proceedings  at  Fairhaven,  Mass.,  September  28  .  609 

Address  of  Welcome  by  Rev.  Frank  A.  Phalen 609 

Response  by  President  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D 611 

Address  by  Rev.  J.  Tyssul  Davis 613 

Address  by  Rev.  John  A.  Kelley 615 

Address  by  Rev.  L.  E.  T.  Andre" 617 

Address  by  Rev.  W.  W.  C.  Pope 617 

Address  by  Professor  Jean  Reville 619 


VI 

PAGE 

Meeting  of  the  Ministerial  Union  at  Channing  Hall,  Septem- 
ber 30,  Rev.  S.  C.  Beach,  D.D.,  presiding 622 

Address  of  Greeting  and  Good  Will  from  the  Ministerial  Fellowship, 

by  Rev   Charles  Roper 622 

Addresses  by  Rev.   Frederick  Summers,  C.  J.  Street,   and  Rev.  V. 

D.  Davis 624 

Congregational  Ministers'  Meeting  in  Pilgrim  Hall 625 

Welcome  of  International  Delegates 625 

Addresses  by  Various  Delegates 625 

Twentieth  Century  Club  Luncheon,  September  28     625 

Addresses  by  delegates 625 

After-meetings  conducted  by  the  International  Congress  .   .   .  626 

In  Ann  Arbor 626 

In  Chicago 626 

At  the  Connecticut  Valley  and  Worcester  County  Unitarian  Con- 
ferences        628 

At  Pittsburg,  Cincinnati,  and  St.  Louis  German  American  Churches,  629 

At  Berkeley,  Cal.,  and  elsewhere      629 


APPENDIX. 

Foreign  Letters  and  Communications  Received  by  the  Committee  : 

From  England: 

Professor  J.  Estlin  Carpenter,  D.D 630 

Mrs.  Humphry  Ward 631 

Rev.  Stopford  Brooke,  D.D 631 

Ion  Pritchard,  Esq 631 

From  Belgium: 

Senator  Count  Goblet  d'Alviella 631 

Rev.  James  Hocart 632 

From  France: 

Rev.  J.  fimile  Roberty 632 

Pere  Hyacinthe  and  Madame  Loyson 633. 

Rev.  Charles  Wagner      633 

Rev.  Camille  Rabaud 633 

Rev.  fimile  Bruniquel 633 

Rev.  J.  Joye 633 

Professor  Paul  Sabatier,  D.D 634 

G.  Benoit-Germain 634 

From  Germany: 

Deutscher  Protestantenverein 634 

Cablegram  of  Invitation  to  International  Congress 635 

Professor  Rudolf  Eucken,  Ph.D 635 

Professor  H.  H.  Wendt,  D.D 636 

Professor  H.  Weinel,  D.D 636 


Vll 

PAGET 

Professor  W.  Bousset,  D.D 636 

Professor  E.  Troeltsch,  D.D 637 

Professor  E.  Simons,  D.D 637 

Rev.  O.  Veek,  D.D 637 

Oberlehrer  Th.  Schneider 638 

Pastor  Jatho 639 

Free  Religious  Congregation  of  Koenigsberg 639 

Rev.  C.  Schieler,  D.D 639 

Rev.  Georg  Schneider 640 

From  Norway: 

Professor  Johannes  Ording        640- 

Rev.  Herman  Haugerud 641 

From  Holland: 

The  Remonstant  Society 641 

Dutch  Congregation,  St.  Petersburg,  Russia 641 

From  Hungary: 

Geza   Schulek,    Budapest,    Protestant   Reformed    Theological 

Seminary 642 

Unitarian  Bishop  Joseph  Ferencz 642 

From  Switzerland: 

Swiss  Association  for  a  Free  Christianity 642 

L.  Mare"chal:  Geneva  Section  for  a  Free  Christianity 643 

From  New  Zealand: 

Rev.  W.  Tudor  Jones 643 

From  India: 

Brahmo-Somaj  Committee  of  India,  Professor  B.  Nath  Sen  .    .  643 

Theistic  Conference  of  India,  H.  C.  Sarkar 643 

Pundit  S.  N.  Sastri 644 

Prarthana  Samaj  of  Bombay 644 

Akbar  Masih 645 

V.  R.  Shinde 645 

J.  C.  Ganguli 646 

Khasi  Hills  Unitarian  Union 646 

From  South  America: 

Sefior  John  Trumbull 646 

Sefior  Ricardo  Palma 647 

The  United  States: 

First   German   Evangelical   Congregation,    Duquesne   Heights, 

Pittsburg 647 

Rabbi  David  Philipson,  President  Central  Conference  American 

Rabbis 647 


Index  of  Illustrations     649 

Index  of  Speakers 650 


FOREWORD. 

The  present  volume  contains  the  proceedings,  addresses,  and 
papers  of  the  Fourth  International  Congress,  held  in  Boston,  Sep- 
tember 22-27,  under  the  auspices  of  the  International  Council 
of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers. 
This  Council  was  organized  in  Boston  in  May,  1900,  at  a  meeting 
in  Channing  Hall,  called  and  presided  over  by  Rev.  Samuel  A. 
Eliot,  D.D.,  president  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association,  of 
which  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte  was  secretary,  and  which  was  par- 
ticipated in  by  a  number  of  representative  foreign  liberals.  Its 
purpose  is  "to  open  communication  with  those  in  all  lands  who 
are  striving  to  unite  pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty,  and 
to  increase  fellowship  and  co-operation  among  them." 

This  International  Council  seeks  to  bring  into  closer  union,  for 
exchange  of  ideas,  mutual  service,  and  the  promotion  of  their  com- 
mon aims,  the  historic  liberal  churches,  the  liberal  elements  in  all 
churches,  the  scattered  liberal  congregations  and  isolated  workers 
for  religious  freedom  and  progress  in  many  lands. 

It  aims  to  be  a  source  of  encouragement  and  strength  to  them  in 
their  struggles  against  dogmatic  intolerance  and  ecclesiastical  tyr- 
anny. 

It  cultivates  large  and  fraternal  relations  with  the  great  liberal 
movements  in  religion  now  going  on  under  various  names  and  au- 
spices throughout  the  world. 

To  promote  these  ends,  it  holds  a  biennial  or  triennial  Congress 
in  some  acknowledged  seat  of  religious  enlightenment  and  freedom, 
the  general  arrangements  for  which  are  intrusted  to  the  liberal  bodies 
and  communities  which  have  extended  the  invitation.  Such  Con- 
gresses have  been  held  in  London  (1901),  Amsterdam  (1903),  and 
Geneva  (1905),  attended  by  from  500  to  1,000  members,  representing 
fifteen  nationalities  and  some  twenty-five  religious  fellowships. 


The  papers  and  proceedings  of  these  Congresses  have  been  pub- 
lished in  three  volumes.* 

The  next  session  is  to  be  held  in  Berlin,  Germany,  in  1910,  by 
invitation  of  several  liberal  associations  of  that  country. 

A  general  description  of  the  Fourth  Congress,  held  in  Boston,  the 
most  largely  attended  and  successful  thus  far  held,  will  be  found  on 
page  18  of  this  book.  The  present  volume  includes  the  papers, 
addresses,  and  record  of  proceedings  of  all  its  meetings,  except  two 
or  three  of  the  smaller  gatherings  and  the  banquet.  The  speeches 
at  the  latter,  while  delightful,  were  mostly  of  a  post-prandial  nature, 
and  were  fully  reported  in  the  Boston  Christian  Register  of  Oct. 
10,  1907. 

The  papers  and  addresses  before  the  Boston  Congress  were  all 
read  in  English,  save  three,  but  many  of  them  were  translated  from 
their  originals  in  foreign  tongues.  Various  hands  were  engaged  in  this 
task.  The  essay  of  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  and  Professor  Martin 
Rade's  paper  on  "The  Burden  and  Blessing  of  Tradition,"  were 
rendered  into  English  by  Rev.  J.  F.  C.  Meyer,  of  South  Natick. 
Rev.  E.  W.  Lummis,  at  present  pastor  in  Fuldera,  Switzerland,  made 
the  English  version  of  the  address  by  Rev.  L.  Ragaz  on  "The  Eth- 
ical Basis  of  Liberal  Christianity."  Miss  Lilian  Muldowney  ren- 
dered into  English  the  address  by  Rev.  E.  Rochat.  The  editor  of 
this  volume  is  responsible  for  the  translation  of  papers  by  Professor 
R.  Eucken,Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer,  and  Abbe  Houtin,and  the  revision 
of  all  the  addresses  of  non-English-speaking  delegates.  Most  of 
the  speakers  were  able  to  look  over  the  proofs  of  their  own  articles 
before  their  inclusion  in  this  volume.  It  is  believed,  therefore,  that 
substantial  accuracy  has  been  attained, — a  somewhat  difficult  task  in 

*  "  Liberal  Religious  Thought  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Twentieth  Century."  354  pp.  Ad- 
■dresses  and  Proceedings  of  the  First  Congress  of  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and 
Other  Liberal  Thinkers  and  Workers,  held  in  London,  May  30  to  June  1,  1901.  Edited  by  W. 
Copeland  Bowie,  London.    Two  shillings.    Fifty  cents. 

"Religion  and  Liberty."  555  pp.  Addresses  and  Proceedings  of  the  Second  Congress  of 
the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers, 
"held  in  Amsterdam,  Holland,  Sept.  1  to  4, 1903.  Edited  by  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr.,  Leiden.  Two 
shillings.    Fifty  cents. 

"Actes  du  III  me  Congres  Internationale  du  Christianisme  Liberal  et  Progressif."  350  pp. 
Octavo.  Addresses  and  Proceedings  at  the  Third  Congress  of  the  International  Council  of 
Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers,  held  in  Geneva,  Aug.  28-31,  1005. 
Edited  by  E.  Montet,  Geneva.  Ten  of  the  papers  in  English.  Two  shillings.  Fifty  cents. 
These  volumes  are  on  sale  by  Philip  Green,  5  Essex  Street,  Strand,  London,  and  the  American 
Unitarian  Association,  35  Beacon  Street,  Boston,  U.S.A. 


view  of  the  many  languages  spoken  by  the  representatives  of  sixteen 
nations  who  participated  in  the  meetings  and  the  brief  space  of  time 
(three  months)  which  has  elapsed  since  the  adjournment  of  the  Con- 
gress. It  is  hoped  that  the  portraits  and  other  illustrations  scattered 
throughout  the  book  may  add  to  its  interest.  To  our  regret,  certain 
others  we  desired  to  include  were  unobtainable. 

The  editor  returns  his  sincere  acknowledgments  to  the  authors 
of  papers,  the  President  and  committees  of  the  Congress,  and  to 
his  fellow-workers  in  all  departments  of  its  activity  for  their  counsel 
and  aid  in  the  preparation  of  this  book. 

CHARLES   W.    WENDTE. 


THE   INTERNATIONAL   COUNCIL   OF   UNITARIAN 

AND  OTHER  LIBERAL  RELIGIOUS 

THINKERS  AND  WORKERS. 

Wi}t  Cotnmtttet,  1907-10. 

Rev.  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  Chairman, 
President  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association,  Boston,  U.S.A. 

Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte,  General  Secretary, 
Minister  First  Parish,  Brighton  (Boston),  25  Beacon  Street,  Boston,  U.S.A., 
to  whom  correspondence  may  be  addressed. 

Professor  Gyorgy  Boros,  D.D., 
Dean  of  the  Unitarian  Seminary,  Kolozsvar,  Hungary. 

Rev.  William  Copeland  Bowte, 
Secretary  of  the  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association,  London,  England. 

Principal  J.  Estlin  Carpenter,  D.D., 
Principal  of  Manchester  College,  Oxford,  England. 

Professor  B.  D.  Eerdmans, 
Professor  in  the  University  of  Leiden,  Holland. 

Rev.  Max  Fischer,  D.D., 
Pastor  of  St.  Mark's  Church,  Berlin,  Germany. 

Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D., 
Minister  of  the  Old  South  Congregational  Church,  Boston,  U.S.A. 

Rev.  Philip  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr., 
Minister  of  the  Free  Congregation,  Amsterdam,  Holland. 

Professor  Edouard  Montet,  D.D., 
Dean  of  the  Faculty  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Geneva,  Switzerland. 

Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  in  the  University  of  Berlin,  Germany. 

Professor  Martin  Rade,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Marburg,  Germany. 

Professor  Jean  Reville,  D.D., 
Pr  lessor  of  the  History  of  Religions  in  the  College  de  France,  Paris. 

Rev.  J.  Emtle  Roberty, 
Minister  at  l'Oratoire  du  Louvre,  Paris,  France. 

Rev.  Gottfried  Schoenholzer,  D.D., 
Pastor  of  the  New  Minster,  Zurich,  Switzerland. 

Miss  Marie  B.  Westenholz, 
Kopenhagen,  Denmark. 


THE  FOURTH  INTERNATIONAL  CONGRESS  OF 
RELIGIOUS  LIBERALS. 

ILocal  Committees. 

BOSTON. 

Executive  Committee. 
SAMUEL    A.    ELIOT,  D.D.,  President. 
CHARLES    W.    WENDTE,  Secretary. 
GEORGE    WIGGLESWORTH,  Treasurer. 
Frederick  A.  Bisbee,  D.D.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D. 

Paul  Revere  Frothingham.  Edwin  D.  Mead. 

Franklin  C.  Sotjthworth. 

Committee  on  Finance. 
GEORGE   WIGGLESWORTH,    Chairman. 
Edwin  F.  Atkins.  Arthur  F.  Estabrook. 

William  Endicott.  Richard  C.  Humphreys. 

Walter  Hunnewell.  George  Hutchinson. 

Arthur  T.  Lyman.  Horace  S.  Sears. 

Moses  Williams. 

Committee  on  Excursions. 

PERCY  A.    ATHERTON,  Chairman. 

William  Brewster.  Lyman  K.  Clark. 

Prescott  Keyes.  Edgar  H.  Nichols. 

Paul  S.  Phalen.  Walter  P.  Winsor. 

Wm.  S.  Kyle.  Wm.  Brewster. 
Horace  Hdldreth. 

Committee  on  the  Supply  of  Pulpits. 
ALFRED    MANCHESTER,  Chairman. 

Committee  on  Press  and  Publication. 
JOHN   L.    SEWALL,  Chairman. 

Committee  on  Hospitality. 
MRS.    PERCY    G.    BOLSTER,  Chairman. 

Reception  Committee. 
WILLIAM    CHANNING    BROWN,  Chairman. 

Official  Reporter. 
FRANK   H.    BURT. 


BOSTON   INTERNATIONAL    CONGRESS    OF 
RELIGIOUS    LIBERALS. 

Honorary  Vice-Presidents. 

Rev.  Lyman  Abbott,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Outlook,  New  York. 

Rev.  John  Coleman  Adams,  D.D.,  minister  Universalist  church,  Hartford, 
Conn. 

Professor  Felix  Adler,  Ethical  Culture  Society,  New  York. 

President  Edwin  A.  Alderman,  president  of  the  University  of  Virginia. 

President  James  H.  Baker,  president  of  the  University  of  Colorado. 

Rev.  George  Batchelor,  editor  of  the  Christian  Register,  Boston,  Mass. 

Mrs.  Henry  W.  Bellows,  Boston,  Mass. 

Hon.  Henry  N.  Blake,  Helena,  Mont. 

Samuel  Bowles,  Esq.,  editor  of  the  Republican,  Springfield,  Mass. 

Rev.  Amory  H.  Bradford,  D.D.,  president  of  the  American  Missionary  Asso- 
ciation. 

Hon.  William  E.  Chandler,  ex-United  States  senator  from  New  Hampshire. 

Samuel  L.  Clemens,  Esq.,  author,  New  York. 

Rev.  Robert  Collyer,  senior  pastor  of  the  Church  of  the  Messiah,  New  York. 

General  Selden  Connor,  ex-governor  of  Maine. 

Francis  Cutting,  Esq.,  Oakland,  Cal. 

Hon.  W.  Murray  Crane,  United  States  senator  from  Massachusetts. 

Hon.  Horace  Davis,  former  member  of  Congress,  ex-president  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  California. 

Professor  Samuel  C.  Derby,  ex-president  of  Antioch  College,  Ohio. 

Hon.  William  L.  Douglas,  ex-governor  of  Massachusetts. 

Hon.  Eben  S.  Draper,  lieutenant-governor  of  Massachusetts. 

President  Charles  W.  Eliot,  president  of  Harvard  University. 

Dr.  Edward  W.  Emerson,  Concord,  Mass. 

President  W.  H.  P.  Faunce,  president  of  Brown  University. 

John  Fretwell,  Esq.,  Boston. 

Principal  Hollis  B.  Frissell,  principal  of  Hampton  Institute,  Hampton,  Va. 

Horace  Howard  Furness,  Esq.,  author,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Hon.  James  R.  Garfield,  United  States  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  Washington, 
D.C. 

Hon.  Paris  Gibson,  ex-United  States  senator  from  Montana. 

Richard  Watson  Gilder,  Esq.,  editor  of  the  Century  Magazine,  New  York. 

Dr.  Daniel  C.  Gilman,  ex-president  of  Johns  Hopkins  University. 

General  A.  W.  Greely,  United  States  Army. 

Mrs.  Frederick  T.  Greenhalge,  Lowell,  Mass. 

Hon.  Curtis  Guild,  Jr.,  governor  of  Massachusetts. 


President  Almon  Gunnison,  president  of  St.  Lawrence  University,  Canton,  N.Y. 

Hon.  Wallace  Hackett,  Portsmouth,  N.H. 

Mrs.  C.  B.  Hackley,  Tarrytown,  N.Y. 

Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D.,  chaplain  of  the  United  States  Senate. 

Rev.  Frank  O.  Hall,  minister  of  the  Church  of  the  Divine  Paternity,  New 

York. 
President  G.  Stanley  Hall,  president  of  Clark  University,  Worcester,  Mass. 
President  Frederick  W.  Hamilton,  president  of  Tufts  College. 
President  George  Harris,  president  of  Amherst  College. 
Miss  Caroline  Hazard,  president  of  Wellesley  College. 
Henry  L.  Higginson,  Esq.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Colonel  Thomas  Wentworth  Higginson,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
Dr.  Emil  G.  Hirsch,  rabbi  of  Temple  Sinai,  Chicago,  111. 
General  Oliver  O.  Howard,  major-general  United  States  Army,  retired. 
Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Boston,  Mass. 
Hon.  Charles  E.  Hughes,  governor  of  New  York. 
Charles  L.  Hutchinson,  Esq.,  Chicago,  111. 
President  William  De  Witt  Hyde,  president  of  Bowdoin  College,  Brunswick, 

Me. 
Hon.  John  P.  Irish,  Oakland,  Cal. 
Rev.  Charles  E.  Jefferson,  D.D.,  pastor  of  Broadway  Tabernacle,  New 

York. 
President  Richard  H.  Jesse,  president  of  the  University  of  Missouri,  Columbia, 

Mo. 
Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  Abraham  Lincoln  Centre,  Chicago,  111. 
President  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Leland  Stanford  Jr.  University, 

Palo  Alto,  Cal. 
Hon.  William  W.  Justice,  Philadelphia. 

Mrs.  Henry  P.  Kidder,  Boston. 

Hon.  Hiram  Knowles,  Missoula,  Mont. 

Hon.  Marcus  P.  Knowlton,  chief  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massa- 
chusetts. 

Hon.  Henry  W.  Lawrence,  Salt  Lake  City. 

Henry  C.  Lea,  Esq.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Hon.  James  P.  Leather,  justice  of  the  Superior  Court  of  Indiana. 

Hon.  John  D.  Long,  former  governor  of  Massachusetts  and  ex-Secretary  of 
the  Navy. 

Miss  Alice  M.  Longfellow,  Cambridge. 

Hon.  William  Caleb  Loring,  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusettts. 

Miss  Emma  C.  Low,  president  of  the  National  Alliance  of  Unitarian  Women. 

Rev.  Clay  MacCauley,  Boston,  Mass. 

St.  Clair  McKelway,  Esq.,  editor  of  the  Brooklyn  Eagle. 

Professor  George  F.  Moore,  D.D.,  professor  in  Harvard  University. 

Hon.  Thomas  J.  Morris,  D.D.,  United  States  Circuit  Judge,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Hon.  James  M.  Morton,  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts. 


8 

Rev.  Philip  S.  Moxom,  D.D.,  minister  of  the  South  Congregational  Church, 
Springfield. 

Rev.  Theodore  T.  Monger,  D.D.,  New  Haven,  Conn. 

Professor  Charles  E.  Norton,  professor  emeritus  in  Harvard  University. 

Hon.  Thomas  W.  Palmer,  ex-United  States  senator  from  Michigan. 

Hon.  George  C.  Perkins,  United  States  senator  from  California. 

President  Henry  S.  Pritchett,  president  of  the  Massachusetts  Institute  of 
Technology. 

Hon.  Frank  S.  Roby,  judge  of  the  Appellate  Court  of  Indiana. 

Jacob  H.  Schiff,  Esq.,  New  York,  N.Y. 

Professor  Nathaniel  Schmidt,  professor  of  Semitic  languages  and  literature, 
Cornell  University. 

President  Jacob  G.  Schurman,  president  of  Cornell  University. 

President  L.  Clark  Seelye,  president  of  Smith  College,  Northampton,  Mass. 

President  William  F.  Slocum,  president  of  Colorado  College,  Colorado  Springs, 
Col. 

Albert  K.  Smiley,  Esq.,  Lake  Mohonk,  N.Y. 

Hon.  Goldwtn  Smith,  Toronto,  Canada. 

Edmund  Clarence  Stedman,  LL.D.,  New  York. 

Hon.  Oscar  S.  Straus,  United  States  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
Washington,  D.C. 

Rev.  Josiah  Strong,  president  of  the  American  Institute  of  Social  Service,  New 
York. 

Rev.  J.  J.  Summerbell,  D.D.,  Dayton,  Ohio. 

President  Joseph  Swain,  president  of  Swarthmore  College,  Pennsylvania. 

Hon.  William  H.  Taft,  United  States  Secretary  of  War,  Washington,  D.C. 

President  James  M.  Taylor,  president  of  Vassar  College,  Poughkeepsie,  N.Y. 

President  Charles  F.  Thwing,  president  of  Western  Reserve  University,  Cleve- 
land, Ohio. 

Dr.  Benjamin  F.  Trueblood,  secretary  of  the  American  Peace  Society,  Boston. 

President  Charles  R.  Van  Hise,  president  of  the  University  of  Wisconsin. 

Judge  Reuben  E.  Walker,  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  Hampshire. 

Hon.  William  D.  Washburn,  ex-United  States  senator  from  Minnesota. 

Rev.  John  B.  Weston,  D.D.,  president  Christian  Biblical  Institute,  New  York. 

President  Benjamin  I.  Wheeler,  president  of  the  University  of  California, 
Berkeley,  Cal. 

Hon.  Alfred  T.  White,  Brooklyn,  N.Y. 

Dr.  James  M.  Whiton,  chairman  New  York  State  Conference  of  Religion. 

Henry  W.  Wilbur,  general  secretary  Friends'  General  Conference,  Philadel- 
phia, Pa. 

Hon.  Willard  A.  White,  Boise",  Ida. 

Mrs.  Roger  Wolcott,  Milton,  Mass. 

Dr.  Robert  S.  Woodward,  president  of  Carnegie  Institute,  Washington,  D.C. 

Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  president  of  Clark  College,  Worcester,  Mass. 


FOREIGN  DELEGATES  IN  ATTENDANCE  ON  THE 
INTERNATIONAL  CONGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS 
LIBERALS. 


GREAT    BRITAIN   AND  IRELAND. 


Rev.  Alexander  O.  Ash  worth,  Belfast, 
Ireland. 

Mrs.  Alexander  O.  Ashworth,  Belfast, 
Ireland. 

John  W.  Barlow,  Bury. 

Thomas  Beaumont,  Sheffield. 

Arthur  V.  Billson,  Ashleigh. 

Rev.  W.  Copeland  Bowie,  London. 

Mrs.  W.  Copeland  Bowie,  London. 

Miss  Clara  Copeland  Bowie,  London. 

Sir  William  Bowring,  Bart.,  Liverpool. 

Lady  Bowring,  Liverpool. 

Henry  R.  Bramley,  Sheffield. 

Rev.  Jabez  A.  Brinkworth,  Saffron 
Walden. 

Miss  Ethel  Brooks,  Wilmslow. 

Miss  Fanny  Brooks,  Wilmslow. 

Miss  Lucy  Brooks,  Wilmslow. 

Miss  Jane  E.  Brown,  Leeds. 

Miss  Carstairs,  Liverpool. 

Herbert  S.  Carter,  Parkstone,  Dorset. 

Rev.  Benjamin  C.  Constable,  Stock- 
port. 

Miss  Emily  Cooke,  Liverpool. 

Rev.  Gordon  Cooper,  London. 

Mrs.  M.  Evelyn  Crompton,  Bolton. 

Miss  Edith  Cropper,  Bolton. 

Dr.  W.  Evans  Darby,  London. 

Rev.  J.  Tyssul  Davis,  Chatham. 

Rev.  Valentine  D.  Davis,  London. 

Rev.  A.  H.  Dolphin,  Sheffield. 

Miss  Jane  Duncan,  Richmond,  Surrey. 

Rev.  Thomas  Dunkerley,  Comber, 
Ireland. 

Rev.  T.  E.  M.  Edwards,  London. 

Rev.  John  Ellis,  Halifax. 

Rev.  E.  D.  Priestley  Evans,  Bury. 


Rev.  E.  Gwilym  Evans,  Dukinfield. 

Rev.  James  Forrest,  Glasgow. 

Mrs.  James  Forrest,  Glasgow. 

Miss  Rebecca  Gardner,  Horsham. 

Miss  M.  Goodyer,  Wilmslow. 

Rev.  J.  L.  Haigh,  Liverpool. 

Mrs.  J.  L.  Haigh,  Liverpool. 

Miss  E.  Hankinson,  Wilmslow. 

Rev.  F.  Hankinson,  London. 

Simon  Harris,  Hull. 

Mrs.  Simon  Harris,  Hull. 

Rev.  Wilfred  Harris,  Bolton. 

Rev.  Charles  Harvey-Cook,  Warring- 
ton. 

Miss  Helen  Brooke  Herford,  London. 

Rev.  E.  Savell  Hicks,  London. 

Rev.  J.  Crowther  Hirst,  Liverpool. 

Rev.  W.  Holmshaw,  Manchester. 

Mrs.  W.  Holmshaw,  Manchester. 

Rev.  John  Hunter,  Glasgow. 

Rev.  Arthur  Hurn,  London. 

Rev.  T.  J.  Jenkins,  Hinckley. 

Miss  Harriet  M.  Johnson,  Liverpool. 

Rev.  E.  Ceredig  Jones,  Bradford. 

Rev.  J.  A.  Kelly,  Belfast,  Ireland. 

Rev.  W.  H.  Lambelle,  Middles- 
brough. 

Herbert  B.  Lawford,  London. 

T.  Oliver  Lee,  Birmingham. 

Miss  E.  Rosalind  Lee,  Stourbridge. 

Fred.  Maddison,  M.P.,  London. 

Rev.  John  McDowell,  Bath. 

H.  B.  Melville,  Kirkcaldy,  Scotland. 

Mrs.  H.  B.  Melville,  Kirkcaldy, 
Scotland. 

Miss  Dorothy  A.  Nicholson,  Hale. 

George  J.  Notcutt,  Ipswich. 


IO 


Mrs.  E.  M.  Ormrod,  Bolton. 

Rev.  A.  Ernest  Parry,  Birkenhead. 

Rev.  Thomas  Paxton,  Birmingham. 

Mrs.  Thomas  Paxton,  Birmingham. 

Rev.  Charles  Peach,  Manchester. 

Rev.  J.  Arthur  Pearson,  Oldham. 

Mrs.  J.  Arthur  Pearson,  Oldham. 

Rev.  Gertrude  von  Petzold,  Leicester. 

Col.  Thomas  Phillips,  Aberdare, 
So.  Wales. 

Rev.  J.  Channing  Pollard,  Lancaster. 

Rev.  W.  W.  Chynoweth  Pope,  London. 

John  Preston,  Stockport. 

Mrs.  John  Preston,  Stockport. 

Rev.  W.  G.  Price,  Dukinfield. 

Rev.  Henry  Rawlings,  M.A.,  London. 

Rev.  H.  D.  Roberts,  Liverpool. 

Mrs.  H.  D.  Roberts,  Liverpool. 

Reuben  Robertson,  Lytham. 

Rev.  Thomas  Robinson,  Altrincham. 

Rev.  Charles  Roper,  London. 

Rev.  J.  Ruddle,  Sheffield. 

Mrs.  Henry  Rutt,  London. 

Rev.  Matthew  R.  Scott,  Bolton. 

Miss  A.  Elizabeth  Shaen,  London. 

Rev.  William  R.  Shanks,  Leeds. 

William  Shaw,  Dukinfield. 

Miss  Fanny  A.  Short,  London. 

Rev.  H.  Bodell  Smith,  Manchester. 

Rev.  Thomas  P.  Spedding,  Stockport. 

Miss  Elizabeth  J.  Spencer,  Southamp- 
ton. 


Rev.  James  E.  Stead,  Manchester. 

Rev.  Christopher  J.  Street,  Sheffield, 

Rev.  Frederick  Summers,  London. 

Mrs.  Frederick  Summers,  London. 

Miss  E.  E.  Talbot,  London. 

Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant,  London. 

Rev.  Hugon  S.  Tayler,  Chesterfield. 

Rev.  Felix  Taylor,  Richmond. 

Miss  Harriet  Taylor,  Bolton. 

Rev.  A.  Hermann  Thomas,  Lough- 
borough. 

Rev.  T.  Arthur  Thomas,  Llandyssul,. 
Wales. 

Rev.  Charles  Travers,  Preston. 

Rev.  William  L.  Tucker,  London. 

Rev.  Ellison  A.  Voysey,  Northampton, 

John  A.  Wadsworth,  Halifax. 

Rev.  Alexander  Webster,  Aberdeen, 
Scotland. 

Miss  Christine  Wells,  St.  Albans,  Scot- 
land. 

Ernest  J.  White,  Bath. 

J.  Harrop  White,  Mansfield. 

Mrs.  J.  Harrop  White,  Mansfield. 

Louis  N.  Williams,  Aberdare,  So.. 
Wales. 

Jeremiah  Wigley,  Manchester. 

Miss  Robina  Winn,  Hull. 

Rev.  J.  J.  Wright,  Manchester. 

Rev.  C.  M.  Wright,  Birmingham. 

Rev.  Isaac  Wrigley,  Stourbridge. 


AUSTRIA. 

Professor  Thomas  Garrigue  Masaryk,   Dr.   Philos.,   University  of  Prague; 
Mrs.  Olga  Masaryk,  Prague;  Miss  Masaryk,  Prague. 

DENMARK. 
Mr.  Theo.  Berg,  Copenhagen,  editor  Lys  Over  Landet. 


FRANCE. 

Professor  A.  Gaston  Bonet-Maury,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  University  of  Paris;  Abbe* 
A.  Houtin,  Paris;  Professor  Jean  Reville,  D.D.,  College  de  France,  Paris; 
Madame  Reville,  Paris;  T.  R.  Slattery,  Paris. 


II 


GERMANY. 


Rev.  Max  Fischer,  D.D.,  pastor  St.  Mark's  Church,  Berlin;  Fraulein 
Margarete  Fischer,  Berlin;  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  D.D.,  University  of  Berlin; 
Professor  Martin  Rade,  D.D.,  University  of  Marburg;  Frau  Rade,  Marburg; 
Dr.  Janet  Perkins,  Berlin;  Dr.  Wilhelm  Cohnstaedt,  Frankfort-am-Main. 


GUIANA,    DUTCH     SOUTH    AMERICA. 
Mr.  Rudolphus  L.  Worst,  Paramaribo. 

HOLLAND. 

Rev.  F.  C.  Fleischer,  pastor  Mennonite  Church,  Makkum;  Professor  H.  Y. 
Groenewegen,  D.D.,  University  of  Leiden;  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr.,  pastor 
Free  Congregation,  Amsterdam;  Professor  H.  U.  Meyboom,  D.D.,  University 
of  Groningen;  Miss  Meyboom,  Groningen;  Miss  A.  Opwyrda,  The  Hague; 
Miss  Theodora  van  Eck,  Oegstgelt;  Miss  Agnes  Henny,  Zutphen. 

HUNGARY. 

Rev.  Nicolas  Jozan,  pastor  Unitarian  Congregation,  Budapest. 

INDIA. 

M.  Barakatullah,  Bhopal;  S.  L.  Joshi,  Calcutta;  D.  L.  Joshi,  Calcutta, 
Professor  Sakharan  Ganesh  Pandit,  Bombay;  Professor  G.  Subba  Rau,  M.A., 
Calicut;  S.  C.  K.  Rutnam,  M.A.,  Ceylon;  B.  M.  Sehanavis,  B.A.,  Calcutta. 

ITALY. 
Rev.  L.  E.  Tony  Andre*,  D.D.,  pastor  Evangelical  Reformed  Church,  Florence. 

JAPAN. 

Rev.  Saichiro  Kanda,  Tokio;  Sakyo  Kanda,  Tokio;  Miss  Catherine  Osborn, 
Universalist  Mission,  Tokio;  Sakusuke  Momekura,  Tokio;  T.  Watanabe; 
K.  Kanokogi. 

NEW   ZEALAND. 
Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond,  Wellington. 

SWEDEN. 
Professor  O.  E.  Lindberg,  Gotheburg. 


12 


SWITZERLAND. 

Professor  iSdouard  Montet,  D.D.,  dean  Theological  Faculty,  University  of 
Geneva;  Rev  Leonhard  Ragaz,  pastor  at  the  cathedral,  Basel;  Mrs.  Ragaz, 
Basel;  Rev.  Ernest  Rochat,  D.D.,  pastor,  Geneva;  Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer, 
pastor  New  Minster,  Zurich. 

UNITED    STATES. 

The  enrolled  members  of  American  nationality  in  the  Boston  International 
Congress  numbered  over  twenty-two  hundred.  The  names  of  many  who 
took  a  prominent  part  in  the  meetings  will  be  found  scattered  through 
the  pages  of  this  volume. 


13 


OFFICIAL  DELEGATES  TO  THE   INTERNATIONAL 

CONGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS  LIBERALS  AT 

BOSTON,  SEPTEMBER,  1907. 

Note. — Names  marked  with  an  asterisk  are  those  of  delegates  who,  so  far  as 
known,  were  unable  to  attend  the  Congress. 

DELEGATES    FROM    ASSOCIATIONS  IN    THE  UNITED  STATES. 

1.  American  Unitarian  Association:  S.  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  President;  Rev. 
Charles  E.  St.  John,  Secretary;  Mr.  Francis  H.  Lincoln,  Treasurer. 

2.  National  Conference  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Christian  Churches: 
Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  President;  Rev.  Paul  Revere  Frothingham,  Chair- 
man of  the  Council;  Rev.  Walter  F.  Greenman,  Secretary. 

3.  National  Alliance  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Ld3eral  Christian 
Women:  Miss  Emma  C.  Low,  President;  Mrs.  Emily  A.  Fifield;  Mrs.  R.  H. 
Davis. 

4.  Western  Unitarian  Conference:  *Rev.  Wilson  M.  Backus,  Secretary; 
Rev.  Miss  Mary  A.  Safford,  Secretary;  Rev.  Minot  O.  Simons;  Rev.  John  W. 
Day. 

5.  Unitarian  Sunday  School  Society:  Rev.  Edward  A.  Horton,  Presi- 
dent; Rev.  W.  I.  Lawrance. 

6.  Unitarian  Conference  of  the  Middle  States  and  Canada:  Rev. 
Thomas  R.  Sheer,  D.D.;  Rev.  George  H.  Badger,  Secretary;  Rev.  William  S. 
Barnes. 

7.  Southern  Conference  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Christian 
Churches:  Rev.  William  H.  Ramsay;  Rev.  Clifton  M.  Gray,  Secretary. 

8.  Pacific  Unitarian  Conference:  *Hon.  Horace  Davis,  Rev.  W.  G. 
Eliot,  Jr.,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Henry  F.  Spencer. 

9.  Young  People's  Religious  Union:  Mr.  Fred.  G.  Melcher,  Miss  Eliza- 
beth Loring. 

10.  Ministerial  Union:  Rev.  Henry  C.  De  Long,  Rev.  Roderick  Stebbins, 
Rev.  Eugene  R.  Shippen. 

11.  Faculty  of  DrvrNiTY  in  Harvard  University:  Professor  William 
Wallace  Fenn,  Dean;  Professor  George  F.  Moore,  D.D. 

12.  Meadville  Theological  School:  Rev.  Franklin  C.  Southworth, 
President;  Professor  Francis  A.  Christie;  Professor  George  L.  Cary,  D.D.; 
Professor  H.  H.  Barber. 

13.  Pacific  Unitarian  School  for  the  Ministry:  *Rev.  George  W. 
Stone,  *Mr.  and  Mrs.  Francis  Cutting. 


14 

14-  Boston  Association  of  Ministers:  Rev.  W.  H.  Lyon,  D.D.,  Mod- 
erator; Rev.  James  Huxtable,  Scribe. 

15.  Benevolent  Fraternity  of  Churches:  Rev.  P.  R.  Frothingham, 
President;  Mr.  Courtenay  Guild;  Mr.  Ernest  Jackson,  Secretary. 

16.  Children's  Mission:  Mr.  Parker  B.  Field,  Mr.  Henry  M.  Williams. 

17.  Society  for  Ministerial  Relief:  Mr.  Thomas  Minns,  Mr.  Arthur  T. 
Lyman. 

18.  Unitarian  Club,  Boston:  Mr.  Solomon  Lincoln,  President;  Mr.  Charles 
W.  Birtwell,  Secretary. 

19.  Channing  Club:  Mr.  Geo.  H.  Ellis,  President;  Mr.  Henry  C.  Noble; 
Mr.  Frederick  W.  Porter,  Secretary. 

20.  Harvard  Unitarian  Club:  Rev.  E.  M.  Slocombe,  Mr.  Paul  S. 
Phalen. 

21.  The  Norse  Unitarian  Association  of  America:  Rev.  Amadeus 
Norman,  Prof.  J.  J.  Skoerdalsvald,  *Hon.  A.  O.  Owen. 

22.  Ministers'  Institute:  Rev.  Augustus  M.  Lord,  Rev.  Frank  W.  Pratt. 

23.  Universalist  General  Convention:  Rev.  J.  C.  Adams,  D.D.;  Rev. 
M.  D.  Shutter,  D.D.;  Rev.  Lee  S.  McCollester,  D.D.;  Rev.  George  L.  Perin, 
D.D.;  Rev.  W.  C.  Selleck,  D.D.;  Rev.  Florence  K.  Crooker;  Mr.  Henry  M. 
Dodge;    Mr.  Hosea  Ballou. 

24.  Women's  National  Missionary  Association  of  the  Universalist 
Church:  Mrs.  Cordelia  A.  Quimby,  Mrs.  Marion  D.  Shutter,  Mrs.  Adelaide 
B.  Kimmel,  Miss  Catherine  Osborne,  Miss  Emma  F.  Foster. 

25.  Massachusetts  Universalist  Convention:  Rev.  R.  Perry  Bush, 
D.D.;  Rev.  George  F.  Knight,  D.D. 

26.  Crane  Theological  Seminary,  Tufts  College:  F.  W.  Hamilton, 
D.D.,  President;  Rev.  George  F.  Knight,  D.D. 

27.  Theological  Faculty  of  St.  Lawrence  University:  Rev.  Henry  P. 
Forbes,  Dean. 

28.  General  Conference  of  the  Religious  Society  of  Friends: 
Joseph  J.  Janney  William  G.  Brown,  Elizabeth  Powell  Bond,  Susan  W.  Janney, 
R.  Barclay  Spicer,  Sarah  T.  Miller,  Bertha  Janney,  Sarah  Gardner  Magill, 
Ruth  C.  Wilson,  Eliza  M.  Wilbur,  Elwood  Roberts,  Samuel  Livesey,  Mary 
Travilla,  George  A.  McDowell,  Harry  A.  Hawkins,  Rachel  W.  Underhill,  Anna 
M.  Jackson,  Norwood  P.  Hallowell,  Dr.  Joseph  Swain,  Elizabeth  G.  Haviland, 
John  W.  Hutchinson,  Ellwood  Burdsall,  T.  O.  Atkinson,  Benjamin  H.  Miller, 
Edward  A.  Pennock,  Edward  H.  Magill,  Isaac  Wilson,  Henry  W.  Wilbur, 
Phebe  Wilbur  Griffin,  Mrs.  Elwood  Roberts,  Mary  R.  Livesey,  Edward  P. 
Thomas,  Jane  C.  McDowell,  Charles  F.  Underhill,  William  M.  Jackson,  Job 
H.  Wilbur,  Sarah  H.  Hallowell,  James  S.  Haviland,  Martha  G.  Haviland,  E. 
Eliza  Hutchinson,  Luella  M.  Burdsall,  Ellen  D.  Smith. 

29.  American  Christian  Convention:  Rev.  J.  J.  Summerbell,  D.D.; 
Rev.  J.  B.  Weston,  D.D.;  Rev.  Alva  H.  Morrill,  D.D.;  Rev.  George  A.  Coni- 
bear. 

30.  German  Evangelical  Churches  of  Pittsburg,   Cincinnati,   and 


*5 

St.  Louis:  Rev.  Hugo  Eisenlohr;  *Rev.  Charles  Voss;  *Rev.  J.  H.  Asbeck, 
D.D.;  *Rev.  Pedro  Ilgen,  D.D. 

31.  Free  Religious  Association  of  America:  Colonel  Thomas  Went- 
worth  Higginson,  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte. 

32.  Congress  of  Religion:  Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  *Rev.  C.  A.  Osborne, 
Miss  Mary  E.  Hawley. 

33.  New  York  State  Conference  of  Religion:  Dr.  J.  M.  Whiton,  *Rabbi 
Silbermann,  Rev.  Thomas  R.  Sheer. 

GREAT    BRITAIN    AND    IRELAND. 

(32  Associations.) 

34.  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association:  Sir  W.  B.  Bowring, 
Bart.;  Rev.  W.  Copeland  Bowie;  Rev.  V.  D.  Davis,  B.A.;  Rev.  C.  J.  Street, 
M.A.,  LL.B;  Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant,  B.A. 

DISTRICT    SOCIETIES,  ENGLAND. 

35.  East  Cheshire  Christian  Union:  Rev.  B.  C.  Constable. 

36.  Eastern  Union  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Free  Christian  Churches:  Mr. 
G.  J.  Notcutt. 

37.  Liverpool  District  Missionary  Association:  Rev.  H.  D.  Roberts. 

38.  London  District  Unitarian  Society:  Rev.  E.  Savell  Hicks,  M.A. 

39.  London  and  South  Eastern  Counties  Provincial  Assembly:  Rev.  T.  E.  M. 
Edwards. 

40.  Manchester  District  Association:  Rev.  W.  Holmshaw,  Rev.  C.  Peach. 

41.  Midland  Christian  Union:  Rev.  I.  Wrigley,  Mr.  T.  Oliver  Lee. 

42.  Midland  Sunday  School  Association:  Rev.  Thomas  and  Mrs.  Paxton. 

43.  North  and  East  Lancashire  Unitarian  Mission:  Rev.  J.  J.  Wright. 

44.  North  Lancashire  and  Westmoreland  Unitarian  Association:  Rev. 
Charles  Travers,  Rev.  J.  C.  Pollard. 

45.  North  Midland  Presbyterian  and  Unitarian  Association:  Rev.  A.  Her- 
man Thomas,  Mrs.  Harrop  White. 

46.  Northumberland  and  Durham  Unitarian  Association:  Rev.  W.  H. 
Lambelle. 

47.  Provincial  Assembly  of  Lancashire  and  Cheshire:  Rev.  T.  P.  Spedding. 

48.  Southern  Unitarian  Association:  Mr.  H.  S.  Carter,  Miss  E.  J.  Spencer. 

49.  Western  Union  of  Unitarian  and  Free  Christian  Churches:  Rev.  John 
McDowell. 

50.  Yorkshire  Unitarian  Union:  Mr.  H.  Bramley,  Mr.  T.  Beaumont. 

DISTRICT    SOCIETIES,  WALES. 

51.  South  Wales  Unitarian  Association:  Rev.  T.  A.  Thomas. 

52.  South-east  Wales  Unitarian  Society:  Mr.  L.  N.  Williams. 


i6 


SCOTLAND. 

53.  Scottish  Unitarian  Association:  Rev.  James  Forrest,  M.A. 

IRELAND. 

54.  Association   of   Irish   Non-subscribing   Presbyterians   and   Other    Free 
Churches:  Rev.  T.  Dunkerley,  B.A.,  Rev.  J.  A.  Kelly. 

GENERAL    SOCIETIES,    GREAT    BRITAIN. 

55.  The  National  Triennial  Conference:  Sir  William   B.  Bowring,  Mr.  J. 
Harrop  White. 

56.  General  Baptist  Assembly  of  Messengers,  Elders,  and  Representatives: 
Rev.  J.  A.  Brinkworth. 

57.  Missionary  Conference:  Rev.  W.  R.  Shanks,  Rev.  H.  Bodell  Smith. 

58.  The  Ministerial  Fellowship:  Rev.  A.  H.  Dolphin,  Rev.  J.  C.  Hirst. 

59.  Central  Postal  Mission:  Miss  E.  Talbot. 

60.  National  Unitarian  Temperance  Association:  Miss  Harriet  Johnson. 

61.  Laymen's  Club:  Mr.  H.  B.  Lawford. 

62.  Women's  Social  Club:  Mrs.  Copeland  Bowie. 

63.  Manchester  College,  Oxford:  Rev.  V.  D.  Davis,  B.A. 

64.  Unitarian  Home  Missionary  College,  Manchester:  Rev.  J.  A.  Pearson. 

65.  The  Sunday  School  Association:  Rev.  J.  J.  Wright,  Rev.  H.  Rawlings, 
M.A. 

66.  Manchester   District   Sunday   School   Association:  Rev.   W.    G.    Price, 
Rev.  J.  E.  Stead,  Mr.  Jeremiah  Wigley. 

GERMANY. 

67.  Der  Deutsche  Protestantenverein :  Rev.  Max  Fischer,  D.D. 

68.  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt:  Professor  Martin  Rade,  D.D. 

69.  Deutsche  Freie  Gemeinden  zu  Koenigsberg,  Dantzic,  Tilsit,  und  Frank- 
fort-am-Main:  *Dr.  Julius  Rupp,  *Rev.  Carl  Schieler,  *Rev.  Georg  Schneider. 

HOLLAND. 

70.  Nederlandsche  Protestantenbond:  Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  D.D.; 
Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr. 

71.  Remonstrantsche  Broederschap:  Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  D.D. 

72.  De  Vrije  Gemeente,  Amsterdam:  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr. 

73.  Commissie  voor  de  Zondagschulen  von  den  Nederl.  Protestantenbond: 
Miss  Theodora  van  Eck. 

HUNGARY. 

74.  The  Hungarian  Unitarian  Churches:  Rev.  Nicolas  Jozan. 

75.  The  Body  of  Professors  of  the  Budapest  Reformed  Theological  Academy 
(Budapesti  reformatus  theologiai  tanari  kar) :  *Professor  Farkos  Szoets. 


i7 


SCANDINAVIA. 

76.  Det  Fri  Kerkesamfund  of  Denmark  and  Unitarian  Congregations  of 
Norway:  Mr.  Theo.  Berg. 

SWITZERLAND. 

77.  Schweizerischer  Verein  fuer  freies  Christentum:  Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer. 

78.  Section  de  Geneve  de  l'Union  Suisse  du   Christianisme  Liberal:  Rev. 
E.  Rochat,  D.D.,  *Rev.  Louis  Maystre. 

FRANCE. 

79.  Union  des  figlises  Reformers  Unies:  Professor  Jean  ReVille,  D.D. 

80.  Faculte   Libre  de  TWologie   Protestante,   Paris:  Professor   G.   Bonet- 
Maury. 

81.  La  Revue  Chr&ienne  de  Paris:  Professor  Vi6not,  Directeur;  Rev.  L.  E. 
Tony  Andre\  D.D. 

ITALY. 

82.  figlise  fivangelique  Reforme*e  de  Florence:  Rev.  L.  E.  Tony  Andre\  D.D. 
(unofficial). 

INDIA. 

83.  The  Brahmo-Somaj  Committee  of  India,  Calcutta:  Mr.  Binay  Mohon 
Sehanavis,  B.A. 

84.  Bombay  Prarthana  Somaj  Mandir:  *Mr.  V.  A.   Sukthanker,  Mr.  G. 
Subba  Rau. 

85.  Religio-Philosophical  Assocation  (Kashi  Tattva  Sabbha)  of  Benares: 
Mr.  Sakharam  Ganesh,  Pandit. 

86.  Khasi  Hills  Unitarian  Union,  Assam:  *Kynjro  Singh. 

JAPAN. 

87.  The  Japanese  Unitarian  Association:  Rev.  Saichiro  Kanda. 

88.  The  Universalist  Mission  in  Japan:  Miss  Catherine  Osborn. 

89.  The  Unity  Club,  Tokio:  Mr.  Saseko. 

AUSTRALIA. 

90.  The  Australian  Church:  *Rev.  Charles  Strong,  D.D. 

91.  Unitarian  Churches  in  Australia:  *Rev.  R.  B.  Lambley. 

92.  The  Unitarian  Churches  of  New  Zealand:  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond. 


*8 


PROGRAM. 

SUNDAY,  SEPTEMBER    22. 

10.30  a.m.  Members  of  the  Congress  conduct  services  in  dif- 
ferent city  and  suburban  churches. 

[A  special  circular  announcing  the  churches,  preachers,  and  times  0) 
services.] 

4  p.m.  Public  organ  recital  in  the  First  Church.  Mr.  Arthur 
Foote,  organist. 

8  p.m.  Opening  meeting  of  the  Congress  in  Symphony  Hall, 
The  music  led  by  a  chorus  of  300  from  the  Handel  and  Haydn  So- 
ciety. Mr.  Emil  Mollenhauer,  conductor;  Mr.  H.  G.  Tucker,  or- 
ganist. Addresses  by  Rev.  T.  R.  Slicer,  All  Souls'  Church,  New 
York;  Dr.  Edward  E.  Hale,  chaplain  United  States  Senate;  Dr. 
Booker  T.  Washington,  Tuskegee,  Ala. 

MONDAY,   SEPTEMBER    23. 

9  a.m.  Morning  prayer  in  King's  Chapel,  led  by  Rev.  Lewis  G. 
Wilson,  of  Boston. 

10  a.m.  Meeting  in  Tremont  Temple  of  the  National  Conference 
of  Unitarian  and  Other  Christian  Churches. 

MORNING  SESSION., 

10  a.m.  Opening  devotional  meeting.  Address  by  the  Presi- 
dent, Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  LL.D.,  president  of  Clark  College, 
Worcester,  Mass.  Appointment  of  committees  and  introduction  of 
business.  Report  of  the  Council,  by  Rev.  Paul  Revere  Frothing- 
ham,  Chairman,  Boston,  Mass.  Address,  "The  Property  Rights 
and  Duties  of  American  Churches,"  Charles  W.  Eliot,  LL.D.,  presi- 
dent of  Harvard  University.  Address,  "Faith  as  Affected  by  Free- 
dom," Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D.,  minister  of  the  Old  South 
Congregational  Church,  Boston. 

12.30.    Adjournment. 


19 


AFTERNOON  SESSION. 


2  p.m.  Opening  devotional  meeting.  Address,  "Our  Free 
Churches  in  Relation  to  Theological  Development,"  Professor 
William  W.  Fenn,  A.M.,  B.D.,  dean  of  the  Harvard  Divinity  School. 
Address,  "The  Good  and  Evil  of  Denominationalism,"  Professor 
Francis  A.  Christie,  Meadville  Theological  Seminary,  Meadville,  Pa. 
Address,  "The  Separation  of  Church  and  State,"  Hon.  Marcus  P. 
Knowlton,  chief  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts. 
Address,  "A  United  Liberal  Church,"  Rev.  Marion  D.  Shutter,  D.D., 
minister  of  the  Church  of  the  Redeemer  (Universalist),  Minneapolis, 
Minn.     Reports  of  committees  and  final  business. 

4.30.     Adjournment. 

Concord  Excursion. 

The  foreign  guests  on  Monday  afternoon  make  an  excursion  to 
Concord.  A  special  train  from  the  North  Station  at  2  p.m.  At 
Concord  the  train  met  by  carriages,  and  guests  taken  to  view 
the  various  historic  and  literary  landmarks  of  Concord, — the  scene 
of  the  Concord  fight,  the  homes  and  graves  of  Emerson,  Hawthorne, 
the  Alcotts,  Thoreau,  and  other  liberal  thinkers.  Afternoon  tea 
served  at  the  First  Parish  Meeting-house.  The  return  train  for 
Boston  at  4.45  p.m. 

8  p.m.  Reception  at  the  Hotel  Somerset.  Admission  restricted  to 
members  of  the  Congress.  Special  ticket  furnished  free  to  members 
on  registering.  Brief  addresses  by  Hon.  Curtis  Guild,  Jr.,  governor 
of  the  Commonwealth;  Professor  Montet,  the  retiring  President  of 
the  International  Council;  Sir  William  B.  Bowring,  Bart.,  presi- 
dent of  the  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association;  Dr.  Mey- 
boom,  of  Groningen;  Professor  ReVille,  of  Paris;  Professor  Pfleiderer, 
of  Berlin;  Rev.  S.  Kanda,  of  Tokio;  and  other  friends.  Music  and 
refreshments. 

TUESDAY,    SEPTEMBER    24. 

g  a.m.  Morning  prayer  in  King's  Chapel,  conducted  by  Rev. 
Wm.  G.  Eliot,  Jr. 

10  a.m.  First  Session  of  the  International  Congress  in  Tremont 
Temple.     Opening  devotional  meeting.     Mr.  F.  O.  Nash,  organist. 


20 

Address  of  the  President.  Appointment  of  committees  and  intro- 
duction of  business.  Report  of  the  General  Secretary,  Rev.  Charles 
W.  Wendte,  Boston,  U.S.A.  Address,  "The  Unitarian  Movement 
in  England,"  Rev.  W.  Copeland  Bowie,  secretary  of  the  British 
and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association,  London,  England.  Address, 
"The  Protestantenverein  of  Germany,"  Dr.  Max  Fischer,  minister 
of  St.  Mark's  Church,  Berlin,  Germany.  Address,  "The  Religious 
Crisis  in  France,"  Professor  Jean  ReVille,  professor  in  the  College 
of  France,  Paris,  France. 
12.30.    Adjournment. 

AFTERNOON  SESSION. 

2  p.m.  Opening  devotional  meeting.  Address,  "The  Relig- 
ious Situation  in  Germany,"  Dr.  Martin  Rade,  professor  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Marburg,  Germany.  Address,  "The  State  of  Religious 
Liberalism  in  Romance  Switzerland,"  Dr.  E.  Rochat,  Geneva, 
Switzerland.  Address,  "The  Liberal  Outlook  in  Denmark  and 
Norway,"  Mr.  Theo.  Berg,  Copenhagen. 

3.30.    Adjournment. 

DEPARTMENT  MEETINGS. 

1.  King's  Chapel,  3.30  p.m.  Department  of  Religious  Education, 
Rev.  Franklin  C.  Southworth,  president  of  Meadville  Theological 
School,  presiding.  A  conference  concerning  the  materials  and 
methods  of  Religious  Education  in  family,  school,  and  church.  Ad- 
dresses by  Rev.  Henry  T.  Cope,  secretary  of  the  Religious  Education 
Association,  on  "The  New  Education,"  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  Jr., 
Amsterdam,  Holland,  on  "The  Psychology  of  Conversion,"  and  by 
others. 

2.  Pilgrim  Hall,  Congregational  House,  3.30  p.m.  Department 
of  the  History  and  Philosophy  of  Religion.  Rev.  George  A.  Gordon, 
D.D.,  presiding.  Addresses  by  Rev.  Christopher  J.  Street,  Man- 
chester, England,  on  "The  Relation  of  Christianity  to  Universal 
Religion,"  Professor  R.  Eucken,  of  the  University  of  Jena,  Germany, 
on  "What  does  a  Free  Christianity  require  to  win  the  Victory?" 
Rev.  Gottfried  Schoenholzer,  Zurich,  Switzerland,  on  "A  Protestant 
Declaration  of  Faith,"  and  others. 


UNITARIAN  BUILDING,  BOSTON 
Headquarters  of  the  International  Congress 


'TtBRAJt^ 
OFTHE 

/ERSITY 

OF 


21 

3.  Channing  Hall,  3.30  p.m.  Department  of  New  Americans. 
Dr.  Edward  E.  Hale  presiding.  A  conference  concerning  the 
ways  of  helping  people  of  European  origin  who  are  making  their 
homes  in  America.  Addresses  by  Professor  T.  G.  Masaryk,  of 
Prague,  Rev.  L.  E.  Tony  Andre*,  of  Florence,  Rev.  N.  Jozan,  of 
Budapest,  Rev.  Amandus  Norman,  Hanska,  Minn.,  and  others. 

EVENING  SESSION. 

8  p.m.  Religious  services  in  Arlington  Street  Church.  The  ser- 
vices conducted  by  Rev.  Paul  Revere  Frothingham,  minister  of  the 
church,  and  others.  The  sermon  by  the  Rev.  John  Hunter,  D.D., 
minister  of  the  Trinity  Congregational  Church,  Glasgow.  Music 
by  the  choir  of  Arlington  Street  Church,  Mr.  Lewis  G.  Thompson, 
organist. — At  the  Second  Church.  Overflow  religious  services. 
The  sermon  by  Rev.  U.  G.  B.  Pierce,  minister  of  the  Unitarian 
church  in  Washington,  D.C.  The  services  conducted  by  Revs. 
H.  D.  Roberts,  of  Liverpool,  and  Thomas  Van  Ness. 

WEDNESDAY,    SEPTEMBER    25. 

9  a.m.  Communion  service  in  King's  Chapel.  The  address  by 
the  Rev.  Charles  Gordon  Ames,  D.D.,  of  Boston. 

10  a.m.  The  Third  Session  of  the  International  Congress,  Tremont 
Temple.  Opening  devotional  meeting.  Address,  "The  Relig- 
ious Situation  in  Austria,"  Professor  T.  G.  Masaryk,  University  of 
Prague,  Bohemia.  Address,  "The  Ideals  of  Hungary,"  Rev.  N. 
Jozan,  minister  of  the  Unitarian  church,  Budapest.  Address, 
"The  Condition  of  Religious  Liberalism  in  Holland,"  Professor 
H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  Leiden,  Holland.  Address,  "The  Progress  of 
Theology  in  Scotland,"  Rev.  Alexander  Webster,  minister  of  the 
Unitarian  church,  Aberdeen,  Scotland. 

12  m.     Adjournment. 

2.30  p.m.  Reception  of  the  members  of  the  International  Council 
by  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth  at  the  State  House. 

DEPARTMENT  MEETINGS. 

i.  King's  Chapel,  3.30  p.m.  Department  of  Comity  and  Fellow- 
ship.   Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  of  Chicago,  an  honorary  Vice- 


22 

President  of  the  Congress,  presiding.  A  conference  on  the  pos- 
sibilities of  closer  co-operation  among  the  organized  Christian  fellow- 
ships represented  in  the  Congress.  Addresses  by  Dr.  James  M. 
Whiton,  secretary  of  the  New  York  Conference  of  Religion,  Mr. 
Henry  W.  Wilbur,  secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Promotion  of 
Friends'  Principles,  Rev.  J.  B.  Weston,  D.D.,  New  York,  and  others. 

2.  Old  South  Meeting-house,  corner  Washington  and  Milk 
Streets,  3.30  p.m.  Department  of  Social  and  Public  Service.  Rev. 
J.  H.  Crooker,  D.D.,  presiding.  Addresses  by  F.  Maddison, 
Esq.,  M.P.,  London,  England,  on  "Religion  and  Social  Reforms," 
Rev.  L.  Ragaz,  minister  of  the  cathedral,  Basel,  Switzerland,  on 
"The  Ethical  Basis  of  Liberal  Christianity,"  Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant, 
London,  England,  "The  World  War  with  Intoxicants,"  Rev.  Chas. 
F.  Dole,  and  others. 

3.  Channing  Hall,  3.30  p.m.  Department  of  Women's  Work. 
Miss  Emma  C.  Low,  president  of  the  National  Alliance  of  Unitarian 
and  Other  Christian  Women,  presiding.  Addresses  by  Rev.  Gertrude 
von  Petzold,  London,  England,  Miss  T.  van  Eck,  Amsterdam, 
Holland,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Lady  Bowring,  Miss  Mary  E. 
Richmond,  of  New  Zealand,  Mrs.  R.  H.  Davis,  and  others. 

4.  Library,  4.30  p.m.  Department  of  Press  and  Publication. 
Rev.  Frederick  A.  Bisbee,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Universalist  Leader, 
presiding.  A  conference  of  the  editors  and  publishers  of  the  liberal 
religious  papers  and  periodicals. 

8  p.m.  Fourth  Session  of  the  International  Congress.  Old  South 
Church,  corner  Boylston  and  Dartmouth  Streets.  Opening  de- 
votional meeting,  conducted  by  Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D.  Ad- 
dress, "The  Religious  Situation  in  Italy,"  Rev.  L.  E.  T.  Andre", 
Florence,  Italy.  Address,  "The  Protestants  of  France:  Their  Past 
and  Present  Condition,"  Professor  A.  Gaston  Bonet-Maury,  Uni- 
versity of  Paris.  Address,  "The  Crisis  in  the  Catholic  Church," 
Abbe"  A.  Houtin,  Paris,  France.  Music  by  the  choir  of  the  Old 
South  Church. — The  Second  Church,  Copley  Square.  Hon.  James 
M.  Morton,  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts,  pre- 
siding. Opening  devotional  meeting,  conducted  by  Rabbi  Charles 
Fleischer,  of  Boston.  Address,  "Religious  Forces  in  Japan," 
Mr.  Saichiro  Kanda,  secretary  of  the  Japanese  Unitarian  Associa- 
tion, Tokio.    Address,  "The  Ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj," Professor 


23 

G.  Subba  Rau,  Calicut,  India.  Address  by  Mr.  J.  L.  Joshi,  of 
India,  on  "Missionary  Opportunities  in  India."  Address  by  Mr. 
Barakatullah,  of  Bhopal,  India,  on  "Liberal  Mohammedanism. " 
Music  by  the  choir  of  the  Second  Church. 

South  Congregational  Church.  Rev.  Thomas  R.  Slicer,  D.D., 
presiding.  Professor  O.  E.  Lindberg,  of  Gotheburg,  "The  Re- 
ligious Situation  in  Sweden."  Revs.  Thomas  P.  Spedding  and 
Chas.  Peach  of  England,  "The  Van  Mission  in  England." 

THURSDAY,    SEPTEMBER    26. 

9  a.m.     Morning  prayer  in  King's  Chapel. 

10  a.m.  Fifth  Session  of  the  International  Congress  in  Sanders 
Theatre,  Harvard  University,  Cambridge.  Hon.  John  D.  Long 
presiding.  Address  of  welcome  by  President  Charles  W.  Eliot, 
LL.D.  Address,  "John  Calvin  and  the  Reformation  Monument  at 
Geneva,"  Professor  E.  Montet,  dean  of  the  Theological  Faculty  at 
the  University  of  Geneva.  Address,  "The  Tendency  of  Positive 
Religions  to  Universal  Religion,"  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  D.D., 
University  of  Berlin.  An  illustrated  description  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity by  Professor  Francis  G.  Peabody,  D.D. 

12.30  p.m.  Foreign  guests  and  delegates  invited  by  the  Univer- 
sity to  lunch  at  the  Harvard  Union,  admission  by  red  or  white  badge. 
American  delegates  and  members  invited  to  lunch  by  the  First  Parish 
of  Cambridge  in  the  Parish  House,  admission  by  blue  badge. 

2  to  4  p.m.  Personally  conducted  visits  to  the  university  grounds, 
buildings,  and  museums  and  to  the  historic  and  literary  landmarks 
of  Cambridge. 

From  4  to.  5  afternoon  tea  served  at  the  residence  of  the  President 
of  the  Congress,  25  Reservoir  Street. 

8  p.m.  A  banquet  at  the  Somerset  Hotel  by  invitation  of  the  Uni- 
tarian Club  of  Boston.  Admission  by  special  ticket.  Rev.  Samuel 
M.  Crothers,  D.D.,  presiding.    Addresses  by  distinguished  guests. 

FRIDAY,    SEPTEMBER    27. 

Excursion  to  Plymouth.  A  special  train  from  the  South  Station 
at  9  a.m.  A  special  ticket  required.  At  Plymouth  the  com- 
pany proceed  to  the  First  Parish  Meeting-house.     An  address  of 


24 

welcome  by  Hon.  Arthur  Lord,  president  of  the  Pilgrim  Society. 
Address,  "The  Remonstrants  of  Holland,"  by  Professor  H.  Y. 
Groenewegen,  of  the  University  of  Leiden.  Lunch  served  to  the 
guests  and  foreign  delegates  at  the  Universalist  church  at  i  p.m. 
Visits  to  Plymouth  Rock,  Pilgrim  Hall,  and  other  places  of  interest. 
At  3.10  special  train  for  Boston.  A  stop  of  one  hour  at  Hingham. 
A  visit  to  the  oldest  place  of  public  worship  now  in  use  in  the  United 
States,  the  Meeting-house  of  the  First  Parish.  Afternoon  tea  served 
in  the  First  Parish  House  by  the  ladies  of  the  three  Hingham  Par- 
ishes. Addresses  of  welcome  by  Francis  H.  Lincoln  and  Rev. 
Louis  C.  Cornish. 

SATURDAY,    SEPTEMBER    28. 

Excursion  to  Fairhaven.  A  special  train  from  the  South  Station 
at  9  a.m.  Exercises  in  the  Memorial  Church  at  Fairhaven.  Music 
and  addresses.  Luncheon  in  the  Parish  House  adjoining.  The 
special  train  to  Boston  at  4  p.m. 

SUNDAY,    SEPTEMBER    29. 

Members  of  the  Congress  conduct  services  in  the  different  city 
and  suburban  churches.      (See  special  circular.) 

MONDAY,  SEPTEMBER    30. 

Meeting  of  the  Ministerial  Union,  Channing  Hall,  10  A.M. 
Rev.  Seth  C.  Beach  presiding.  Morning  address  by  Rev.  F.  C. 
Fleischer,  Makkum,  Holland,  "The  Mennonites,  in  their  Inter- 
national Relations."  The  afternoon  address  by  Rev.  Valentine 
D.  Davis,  London,  England.  The  greetings  of  the  English  Min- 
isterial Association  presented  by  its  president,  Rev.  Charles  Roper, 
of  London.    Luncheon  at  12.30. 


25 


THE  BOSTON  INTERNATIONAL  CONGRESS  OF  RELIG- 
IOUS LIBERALS,  SEPTEMBER  22-27,  i9°7- 

The  Fourth  Congress,  held  in  Boston  under  the  auspices  of  the 
International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious 
Thinkers  and  Workers,  was  in  every  respect  a  worthy  successor  of 
the  great  meetings  previously  held  in  London,  Amsterdam,  and 
Geneva.  In  point  of  attendance  it  exceeded  them  all,  and  was  be- 
yond the  anticipation  of  the  Local  Committee.  Provision  had  been 
made  for  the  accommodation  of  fifteen  hundred  persons,  but  nearly 
twenty-four  hundred  registered  themselves  as  members,  paying  the 
Congress  fee,  while  a  much  larger  number  took  part  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Congress.  The  halls  engaged  often  proved  too  small  for 
the  great  audiences  which  presented  themselves,  and  overflow  meet- 
ings had  hurriedly  to  be  arranged.  At  times  four  or  five  well-attended 
and  even  crowded  meetings  were  being  held  at  the  same  hour,  evinc- 
ing the  remarkable  interest  in  the  Congress  taken  by  the  general  pub- 
lic. The  supply  of  badges,  reception  tickets,  programs,  guide-books, 
and  other  souvenirs  also  fell  short  of  the  demand.  But  all  short- 
comings were  graciously  borne,  as  inevitable  under  the  circumstances, 
the  general  satisfaction  over  the  success  of  the  Congress  overcoming 
all  individual  annoyance.  The  centre  of  the  week's  hospitalities 
was  the  Unitarian  Building  on  Beacon  Street.  From  the  window 
boxes  that  stood  on  every  outer  window  sill  of  the  building  gay 
blossoming  plants  and  long  trailing  vines  waved  a  welcome  to  all 
comers.  Between  them  hung  great  laurel  wreaths,  and  on  each  side 
of  the  front  steps  were  decorative  plants.  At  each  side  of  the  entrance 
stands  of  great  silken  flags  of  various  nations  proclaimed  the  inter- 
national character  of  the  Congress  almost  as  clearly  as  the  greeting, 
"Welcome  to  the  International  Congress,"  on  the  front  wall.  With- 
in, brilliant  autumn  flowers  gave  an  air  of  festivity,  and  here,  as  in 
the  churches,  Symphony  Hall,  Tremont  Temple,  and  at  the  hotels, 
and  even  in  the  streets,  the  wearers  of  the  Council  badges,  red  or 
blue,  were  most  hospitably  received. 


26 

All  speakers,  and  all  delegates  from  foreign  countries,  approximat- 
ing two  hundred  in  number,  were  tendered  the  hospitalities  of  the 
Local  Committee,  many  of  them  being  entertained  at  the  Hotel  Belle- 
vue,  next  door  to  the  Unitarian  Building,  as  well  as  at  other  hostelries 
and  in  private  families.  The  chief  places  of  assembly,  Tremont 
Temple,  King's  Chapel,  Channing,  Pilgrim,  and  Ford  Halls,  and  the 
State  House,  were  all  within  five  minutes'  walk  of  the  Congress 
headquarters,  which  proved  a  great  convenience.  The  great  rush 
of  delegates  occurred  on  Saturday,  the  21st.  The  arrangements  for 
their  reception  at  the  Unitarian  Building  had  been  carefully  planned. 
With  a  reception  committee  of  ladies  of  the  Women's  Unitarian 
National  Alliance  in  daily  attendance,  with  bureaus  of  registration 
and  information,  post-office  facilities,  a  corps  of  guides,  mostly  young 
clergymen,  speaking  several  languages  and  assiduous  in  their  atten- 
tions, rest-rooms  and  refreshments,  every  possible  want  of  the  dele- 
gates, American  or  foreign,  seemed  to  have  been  provided  for.  In 
this  connection  the  devoted  and  efficient  service  of  Mr.  George  W. 
Fox,  for  fifty-three  years  assistant  secretary  of  the  American  Uni- 
tarian Association,  of  Rev.  W.  Channing  Brown,  its  Field  Secre- 
tary for  New  England,  of  Miss  Helen  F.  Pettes,  assistant  of  Presi- 
dent S.  A.  Eliot,  Mrs.  Percy  G.  Bolster  and  Miss  Florence  Everett 
of  the  National  Alliance,  of  Miss  Henrietta  S.  Rogers  and  Mr. 
Paul  Phalen  are  gratefully  remembered. 

The  names  of  the  clerical  helpers  were  Revs.  John  H.  Applebee, 
Alfred  W.  Birks,  Louis  H.  Buckshorn,  Albert  W.  Clark,  Arthur  H. 
Coar,  F.  R.  Griffin,  C.  W.  Heizer,  Carl  G.  Horst,  R.  F.  Leavens, 
Samuel  R.  Maxwell,  John  F.  Meyer,  A.  E.  Mullett,  William  W.  Peck, 
George  H.  Reed,  F.  S.  C.  Wicks. 

Besides  the  serious  business  of  the  sessions  ample  opportunities 
were  given  for  recreation  by  a  series  of  social  gatherings  and  excur- 
sions to  neighboring  places  of  interest.  These  are  treated  of  in 
their  appropriate  places  in  this  volume. 

On  Sunday,  the  2 2d  of  September,  according  to  arrangements 
previously  perfected,  some  fifty  clergymen  from  abroad,  chiefly 
British,  occupied  Boston  and  suburban  pulpits,  a  special  printed 
circular  announcing  the  appointments.  This  was  repeated  on  the 
following  Sunday,  the  29th  inst.,  and  proved  an  interesting  and 
valuable  feature  of  the  session. 


27 

The  opening  meeting  in  Symphony  Hall,  spoken  of  elsewhere, 
was  all  that  its  projectors  had  anticipated.  No  one  who  witnessed 
it  will  ever  forget  the  scene:  the  great  audience  of  between  four  thou- 
sand and  five  thousand  persons,  with  other  thousands  trying  vainly 
to  obtain  entrance;  the  platform  crowded  with  distinguished  men 
and  women  belonging  to  many  different  nationalities  and  religious 
fellowships,  and  the  Handel  and  Haydn  chorus  of  three  hundred; 
the  mighty  outburst  of  song  as  the  great  congregation  uplifted  the 
beautiful  hymns  written  for  the  occasion  by  Rev.  F.  L.  Hosmer  and 
Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe  or  stood  reverently  during  the  rendering  of 
the  "Hallelujah  Chorus";  the  rapt  attention  with  which  the  audience 
listened  to  the  "Greeting  and  Message  of  the  Congress,"  "Glory 
to  God  in  the  Highest,"  "Peace  on  Earth,  Good  Will  to  Men," 
voiced  by  Rev.  T.  R.  Slicer,  Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  and  Dr. 
Booker  T.  Washington.  All  felt  it  to  be  a  worthy  and  auspicious 
opening  of  the  week's  proceedings. 

Tremont  Temple,  the  scene  of  most  of  the  meetings  throughout 
the  week,  and  itself  a  beautiful  and  ornate  audience-room  seating 
twenty-five  hundred  persons,  was  decorated  with  festoons  of  the  na- 
tional colors  and  foreign  flags  massed  about  the  organ  and  choir- 
loft.  Appropriate  texts  in  large  lettering  were  posted  conspicuously: 
"After  the  way  that  is  called  heresy,  so  worship  we  the  God  of  our 
fathers,"  "The  truth  shall  make  you  free,"  "Where  the  spirit  of  the 
Lord  is,  there  is  liberty,"  "  One  is  your  father,  even  God,  and  all  ye 
are  brethren."  In  great  gold  letters  on  blue  background,  running 
entirely  around  both  galleries,  were  displayed  the  names  of  the  best- 
known  saints  and  heroes  of  liberal  religion  in  all  countries, — a  glori- 
ous company.    They  were  as  follows: — 

Servetus,  Socinus,  Penn,  Fox,  Hicks,  Francis  David,  Kossuth, 
Vane,  Biddle,  Lindsey,  Priestley,  Martineau,  Bowring,  Armstrong, 
Herford,  Kuenen,  Tiele,  Coquerel,  A.  Rdville,  Fontanes,  Mazzini, 
H.  Lang,  Bluntschli,  Bouvier,  Agassiz,  Schleiermacher,  Rothe, 
Ritschl,  Rammohun  Roy,  Mozoomdar,  Fukuzawa,  Mayhew,  Free- 
man, Channing,  Emerson,  Parker,  Murray,  Ballou,  Gannett,  Hui- 
dekoper,  Peabody,  Alexander  Campbell,  Ware,  Walker,  Dewey, 
Chapin,  Furness,  Bellows,  Clarke,  Hedge,  Bushnell,  Phillips 
Brooks,  Starr  King,  May,  Isaac  Wise,  Franklin,  Jefferson,  Adams, 


28 

Everett,  Webster,  Sumner,  Story,  Bancroft,  Curtis,  Andrew,  Park- 
man,  Mann,  Hawthorne,  Bryant,  Longfellow,  Whittier,  Dorothea 
Dix,  Howe,  Louisa  Alcott,  Lowell,  Holmes. 

The  speakers  announced  on  the  Program  of  the  Congress  were 
worthy  successors  of  these  departed  heroes  of  the  liberal  faith.  In 
intellectual  and  scholarly  value  their  papers  and  addresses  were  equal 
to  the  occasion.  Collected,  for  the  most  part,  in  the  present  volume, 
they  afford  an  excellent  summary  of  the  principles  and  aims  of  relig- 
ious liberalism,  as  well  as  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the  present 
conditions  of  liberal  religion  in  the  leading  countries  of  the  world. 

Very  noteworthy  was  the  spirit — considerate,  conciliatory,  and 
charitable — which  characterized  the  utterances  of  the  week.  Differ- 
ences of  opinion  were  often  expressed,  but  never  in  a  dissonant  or 
unkind  manner.  There  was  an  almost  entire  absence  of  bitterness 
or  denunciation,  even  when  dogmas,  institutions,  and  courses  of 
action  most  hostile  to  the  liberal  cause  were  treated  of.  Through- 
out the  great  affirmations  of  the  liberal  faith  were  emphasized  rather 
than  its  incidental  denials.  The  reports  of  the  liberal  situation  in 
some  of  the  countries  represented  at  the  Congress  were  not  always 
encouraging,  but  this  did  not  abate  in  any  degree  the  fervent  faith 
of  their  spokesmen  in  the  principles  of  liberal  religion  and  its  ulti- 
mate triumph  in  church  and  society. 

The  closing  session,  held  by  invitation  of  the  authorities  of  Harvard 
University  in  the  Harvard  Memorial  Building,  Cambridge,  was  a 
most  impressive  occasion.  The  action  taken  indorsing  the  projected 
monument  in  Geneva  to  the  memory  of  John  Calvin,  and  that  to 
Michael  Servetus  in  Vienne,  France,  was  another  display  of  the 
large-mindedness  and  irenical  purpose  of  this  International  Council 
of  Religious  Liberals. 

To  American  liberals  present  the  spectacle  of  so  many  delegates 
from  foreign  lands  in  attendance  at  the  meetings  (over  one  hundred 
and  twenty  from  Great  Britain  alone)  was  very  inspiring,  and  gave 
them  an  enlarged  idea  of  the  extension  and  promise  of  the  liberal 
religious  movement  throughout  the  world.  Not  less  did  they  felici- 
tate themselves  on  the  wider  fellowship  among  progressive  Chris- 
tians in  the  United  States  which  this  international  gathering  brought 
to   pass.     Several   American   denominations   united   in   welcoming 


29 

and  entertaining  the  Congress.  Among  these  were  the  Unitarians, 
Universalists,  Christians,  and  Liberal  Friends,  together  with  liberal 
associations  like  the  Congress  of  Religion,  the  Free  Religious  Associa- 
tion, and  independent  churches,  as  well  as  broad-minded  individ- 
uals, both  lay  and  clerical,  in  many  of  the  leading  denominations  of 
the  land.  No  such  federation  of  liberal  religious  bodies  had  ever 
before  taken  place  in  the  United  States.  It  is  hoped  that  some  way 
may  be  devised  by  which  it  may  be  continued  hereafter  and  made  to 
contribute  still  more  effectively  to  the  cause  of  religious  freedom 
and  progress  in  this  country.  This  united  action  on  the  part  of 
religious  denominations  and  individuals  through  their  mutual  inter- 
est in  our  International  Congress  is  the  usual  result  of  its  sessions  in 
different  countries,  and  one  of  the  most  valuable  services  it  renders 
them.  It  was  so  at  our  meetings  in  Holland  and  Switzerland,  while, 
in  extending  an  invitation  to  the  Congress  to  hold  its  next  session  in 
Berlin  in  19 10,  the  four  or  five  liberal  associations  of  Germany  which 
united  in  it  have  for  the  first  time  in  their  history  joined  themselves 
together  for  a  common  purpose  and  work, — a  fact  full  of  happy 
auguries  to  their  cause  and  their  country. 

It  only  remains  to  say  that  the  Boston  Congress  was  quite  fully 
reported  in  the  Boston  Transcript,  Globe,  Herald,  and  other  dailies, 
and,  through  the  medium  of  the  Associated  Press,  in  the  leading 
newspapers  of  the  United  States.  The  Christian  Register,  in  four 
successive  issues,  printed  many  of  the  papers  in  full,  as  did  the 
Universalist  Leader,  Chicago  Unity,  and  other  liberal  organs.  Appre- 
ciative notices  also  appeared  in  the  Outlook,  the  Congregationalist, 
the  Friends'  Intelligencer,  and  a  few  other  religious  weeklies.  The 
delegates  from  abroad,  on  their  return  to  their  own  countries,  wrote 
elaborate  and  highly  commendatory  reports  of  the  meetings.  The 
British  Unitarian  weeklies,  the  Inquirer  and  Christian  Life,  devoted 
many  columns  to  the  proceedings  and  papers.  In  three  numbers 
of  the  Dutch  liberal  organ,  Hervorming,  Professor  Meyboom  gave  an 
interesting  account  of  the  Congress.  Professor  Jean  Reville  pub- 
lished a  series  of  comprehensive  and  laudatory  articles  in  Le  Protes- 
tant of  Paris,  and  Rev.  Dr.  Max  Fischer  in  the  Protestantenblatt  of 
Berlin.  Professor  Martin  Rade  printed  in  his  paper,  Die  Christ- 
liche  Welt  of  Marburg,  several  most  discriminating  and  apprecia- 
tive reviews  of  the  Congress.    Mr.  Theo.  Berg,  of  Copenhagen, 


3° 

devoted  a  whole  number  of  his  journal,  Lys  over  Landet,  to  a  detailed 
report.  Prof.  H.  Y.  Groenewegen  in  six  successive  numbers  of  the 
Courant  of  Rotterdam  gave  a  particularly  full  and  excellent 
account  of  the  Boston  meetings.  The  Frankfurter  Zeitung  con- 
tained full  and  well-informed  letters  from  its  special  correspondent 
at  the  Congress,  Dr.  Coehnstadt.  Rev.  A.  Altherr  in  his  Swiss 
liberal  organ,  and  many  others  in  Europe,  India,  Japan,  and  Aus- 
tralia, gave  more  or  less  extended  accounts  of  the  meetings,  thus 
spreading  its  message  of  emancipation,  enlightenment,  and  good- 
will throughout  the  world. 


3i 


OPENING  EXERCISES  OF  THE  FOURTH  INTERNA- 
TIONAL CONGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS  LIBERALS,  IN 
SYMPHONY  HALL,  BOSTON,  ON  SUNDAY  EVEN- 
ING,   SEPT.    22,  1907,   AT    EIGHT    O'CLOCK. 

(Note. — The  largest  hall  in  the  city  suitable  for  such  a  gathering  had  been 
secured  for  the  opening  session  of  the  Congress,  but  proved  to  be  inadequate  to 
the  popular  demands  of  the  occasion.  Long  before  the  appointed  hour  of  be- 
ginning it  was  filled  with  a  great  and  expectant  company,  numbering  not  less 
than  4,000  souls,  crowding  the  platform,  aisles,  and  corridors,  while  thousands 
outside  tried  in  vain  to  gain  access  to  the  hall.) 

ORDER  OF  SERVICE. 

Music  rendered  by  the  Handel  and  Haydn  Society  of  Boston. 
Mr.  Emil  Mollenhauer,  Conductor;  Mr.  H.  G.  Tucker,  Organist. 

Organ  Voluntary. 

Choral,  "A  Mighty  Fortress  is  our  God"  (Martin  Luther), 

/.  S.  Back 

Hymn  (written  for  this  meeting) Tune,  "  Truro  " 

For  he  looked  for  the  city  which  hath  the  foundations,  whose   builder  and  maker  is  God.— 

Hebrews  xi.  10. 

O  Pilgrim  city  by  the  sea, 

In  thee  we  meet  on  kindred  ground, — 
Pilgrims  toward  better  things  to  be, 

By  one  high  faith  and  purpose  bound. 

The  separating  seas  are  crossed, 

Each  heart  is  understood  of  each; 
On  this  our  day  of  Pentecost 

Fade  out  the  lines  of  race  and  speech. 

One  heritage  alike  we  share, 

Unspeakable  and  still  more  vast, — 
The  widening  thought,  the  hope,  the  prayer, 

The  nobler  life  of  all  the  past. 

And  one  the  goal  to  which  we  press 

By  toilsome  paths  as  yet  untrod, — 
Earth's  longed-for  reign  of  righteousness 

The  shining  City  of  our  God. 

O  Thou  through  whom  our  fathers  wrought, 

From  age  to  age  our  trust  and  stay, 
Still  keep  us  open  to  Thy  thought 

And  speed  us  on  our  pilgrim  way  I 

Frederick  L.  Hosmer. 


32 

Responsive  Reading  from  the  Scriptures. 
Chorus. 

"And  the  glory  of  the  Lord  shall  be  revealed,  and  all  flesh  shall  see  it  together; 
for  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it." Handel 

Address,  "Glory  to  God" Rev.  Thomas  R.  Slicer 

Chorus,  "How  lovely  are  the  messengers!"  ....  Mendelssohn 

Address,  "Peace  on  Earth,"  Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D. 

Hymn  (written  for  this  meeting) Tune,  "Benediction" 

Hail!  Mount  of  God,  whereon  with  reverent  feet 
The  messengers  of  many  nations  meet; 
Diverse  in  feature,  argument,  and  creed, 
One  in  their  errand,  brothers  in  their  need. 

Not  in  unwisdom  are  the  limits  drawn 
That  give  far  lands  opposing  dusk  and  dawn. 
One  sun  makes  bright  the  all-pervading  air, 
One  fostering  spirit  hovers  everywhere. 

So  with  one  breath  may  fervent  souls  aspire, 
With  one  high  purpose  wait  the  answering  fire. 
Be  this  the  prayer  that  other  prayer  controls, — 
That  light  divine  may  visit  human  souls. 

The  worm  that  clothes  the  monarch  spins  no  flaw, 
The  coral  builder  works  by  heavenly  law; 
Who  would  to  Conscience  rear  a  temple  pure 
Must  prove  each  stone  and  seal  it,  sound  and  sure. 

Upon  one  steadfast  base  of  truth  we  stand, 
Love  lifts  her  sheltering  walls  on  either  hand; 
Arched  o'er  our  head  is  Hope's  transcendent  dome, 
And  in  the  Father's  heart  of  hearts  our  home. 

Julia  Ward  Howe. 

Address,  "Good  Will  to  Men,"       Dr.  Booker  T.  Washington 

Chorus,  "Hallelujah" Handel 

Benediction Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D. 


33 


THREE  ADDRESSES  ON  THE  GREETING  AND 
MESSAGE  OF  THE  INTERNATIONAL 
CONGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS 
LIBERALS. 

I.     GLORY  TO  GOD. 

BY  REV.  THOMAS  R.  SLICER,  D.D.,  MINISTER  OF  ALL  SOULS'  CHURCH, 

NEW  YORK. 

"In  the  beginning,  God,"  are  the  opening  words  of  the  Genesis. 
That  great  psalm  of  praise  that  is  the  story  of  the  making  of  the 
world  proceeds  until  God  breathes  into  man's  nostrils  the  breath  of 
life  and  man  becomes  a  living  soul.  God  and  the  soul  are  the  only 
words  essential  to  religion.  All  else  is  the  effort  to  build  a  bridge 
between  God  and  the  soul  by  which  the  soul  shall  find  its  way  to 
God  and  God  shall  be  known  to  the  living  soul. 

There  was  with  the  angel  a  great  company  of  the  heavenly  hosts, 
saying,  u  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest;  on  earth  peace  among  men  of 
good  will."  And  the  centuries  that  elapsed  between  that  cosmogony 
in  Genesis  and  the  echoing  upon  the  plains  of  Bethlehem  were  cen- 
turies filled  with  man's  attempts  to  realize  that  he  is  a  living  soul. 

I  am  glad  to-night  to  be  assigned  this  place  in  which  I  conceive 
it  to  be  my  duty  to  lead,  as  far  as  I  may,  your  worship  of  the  living 
God  as  part  of  that  great  company  that  are  echoing  still  the  angelic 
song  of  the  children  of  God.  And  I  recall  that  some  thirty  years  ago, 
when  I  was  striving  to  find  my  way  out  of  the  conditions  of  a  faith 
that  was  taught  in  terms  of  definition  to  a  faith  which  should  achieve 
for  itself  the  victories  of  the  soul,  I  opened  the  pages  of  John  Henry 
Newman  and  found  that  great  Catholic  saying,  "Reason  and  faith 
are  incompatible  in  the  same  mind,  or  nearly  so."  And,  as  I  laid 
down  the  book  of  this  man  out  in  search  of  a  religion,  trying  to  find 
his  way  by  the  "  kindly  light "  through  the  gloom  that  encompassed 
his  mind,  I  opened  my  mail  of  the  day,  and  in  it  there  was  a  letter 
from  Cyrus  Bartol,  who  for  forty-five  years  was  the  minister  of  one 


34 

church  in  this  city  of  Boston,  and  the  first  line  of  that  letter  was, 
u  Reason  is  always  hospitable  to  the  faith  it  is  twin  with."  And 
between  John  Henry  Newman  and  his  glimmering  light  shining  from 
afar,  and  Cyrus  Bartol  with  that  beacon  light  shining  from  within, 
is  comprised  the  history  of  the  difference  between  the  religion  of 
tradition  and  the  religion  of  the  spirit.  Ours  is  a  reasoned  faith:  it 
has,  for  its  beginning,  God;  for  its  process,  God;  for  its  ultimate, 
God;  for  its  inspiration,  God;  and  I  bring  to  this  great  company 
of  liberal  thinkers  and  workers  to-night  this  ascription  of  praise  to 
the  Eternal,  in  confidence  that  religion  was  never  more  firmly 
grounded  in  the  thinking  mind,  nor  more  constantly  achieving  for 
itself  victories  through  the  thinking  mind.  For  we  stand,  as  you 
know,  for  religion  as  a  natural  function  of  the  human  soul.  And  it 
follows,  as  the  functions  that  are  highest  in  human  life — breathing 
and  the  action  of  the  heart,  upon  which  human  life  depends — are 
automatic,  so  religion,  this  highest  natural  function  of  the  human 
soul,  is  also  automatic.  Its  aspiration  and  its  inspiration  are  almost 
unconsciously  its  own  in  the  presence  of  the  living  God.  The  soul, 
this  living  child  of  God,  sits  central,  as  some  ancient  merchant  mirht 
at  the  Damascus  Gate,  and  all  the  caravans  of  the  world  are  coming 
his  way.  He  sorts  the  product  of  the  outlying  districts  of  the  world, 
and  assigns  to  each  its  place  in  the  trades  that  he  conducts.  And  the 
soul,  looking  through  the  gates  of  sense, — the  eye-gate  and  the  ear- 
gate  and  the  gate  of  touch, — is  building  up  from  its  central  position 
the  power  and  efficiency  of  life.  The  church,  therefore,  is  no  sur- 
vival of  the  ages  of  faith.  It  is  a  barrier  built  to  shut  out  the  inroads 
of  despair.  It  is  not  a  monument  over  the  grave  of  dead  illusions: 
it  is  a  beacon  kindled  on  the  headlands  of  hope.  It  is  dynamic;  a 
power-house  for  the  accumulated  energies  of  life,  that  they  may  be 
distributed  to  re-enforce  the  human  soul  in  its  activities  in  the  world. 
It  is  no  sanctuary  of  uncommunicated  mysteries:  it  is  rather  the 
place  for  realizing  the  friendly  intimacies  of  the  soul  with  the  Eternal. 
Now  note  what  threatens  the  Church  even  in  our  aspect  of  it, 
which  is  the  freest.  We  must  recognize  its  constant  tendency  to 
lapses  from  its  great  ideals.  It  has  heard  a  voice  which  has  said  to 
it,  "See  that  thou  make  all  things  according  to  the  pattern  that  I 
■showed  to  thee  in  the  mount";  and  it  is  encouraged  to  believe  that  its 
highest  moment  may  be  made  constant,  and  its  highest  vision  may  be 


35 

permanent.  And  yet  the  moment  that  it  loses  touch  with  this  central 
power,  substituting  contentions  with  men  for  communion  with  God, 
substituting  the  mere  draperies  and  accessories  of  religion  for  its 
vital  principle,  the  Church  turns  to  some  makeshift  for  the  re-enforce- 
ment of  its  power.  It  multiplies  its  services,  it  enriches  its  ritual, 
it  organizes  institutions  for  men  that  have  forgotten  to  pray.  It 
makes  its  observances  more  exact,  and  thus  builds  about  it  barriers 
between  itself  and  the  living  fact  that  it  adores  in  the  great  conscious 
Personality  of  which  its  own  personality  is  the  conscious  child. 

And  so  it  is  also  in  philosophy.  We  are  just  now  threatened  with 
a  danger  that  we  shall  be  drawn  away  from  these  high  intimacies 
with  the  Eternal.  Men  have  been  so  intent  upon  getting  the  phi- 
losophy of  the  life  of  the  soul  down  upon  the  ground,  that  at  Oxford, 
the  ancient  home  of  the  Ideal,  a  school  of  "humanism,"  so  called, 
utters  its  voice;  but  it  will  never,  I  think,  see  at  Oxford  in  the  name 
of  "humanism"  such  a  scene  as  in  the  sixteenth  century  was  wit- 
nessed when  one  Oxford  martyr  said  to  another,  "Be  of  good 
cheer,  Master  Ridley:  we  have  lit  a  candle  in  England  to-day  that 
shall  never  be  put  out."  Men  are  not  martyrs  for  an  accom- 
modation of  truth  to  expediency.  It  comes  to  us  in  the  "History 
of  Rationalism,"  by  Alfred  Benn,  as  Ophelism,  from  its  root  which 
means  "use."  It  is  still  the  effort  to  domesticate  the  celestial 
ideals  on  terrestrial  planes  in  the  name  of  practical  results.  And,  if  I 
may  dare  in  the  presence  of  this  Boston  audience  to  say  it,  in  this 
city  there  has  been  at  least  one  attempt  to  give  us  the  yellow  journalism 
of  philosophy  in  the  name  of  Pragmatism.  "Is  it  effective?  Has 
it  a  cash  value?  Does  it  pay?  Is  it  coming  our  way?"  Not  what 
are  its  absolute  securities,  but  what  are  its  convertible  assets? 
These  are  the  test  questions  on  its  real  examination  papers !  All  these 
are  substitutes  for  the  Ideal  that  threaten  the  soul,  because  the  soul 
has  lost  its  confidence  in  itself  as  the  child  of  the  living  God. 

Now,  mark  you,  this  confidence,  this  sense  of  divine  communion, 
this  consciousness  of  rights  in  God  that  belong  to  the  soul,  reverts 
again  and  again  to  its  idealization  of  life's  energies  and  life's  activi- 
ties. That  for  which  we  have  stood  is  still  true,  that  only  transfigured 
character  can  be  the  effective  means  of  regeneration  for  the  world. 
They  came  to  the  demon-possessed  boy  at  the  foot  of  the  mount 
and  saw  the  Master  of  Life  cast  out  the  demon.    The  disciples  had 


36 

been  with  him  in  the  mount  where  the  Transfiguration  had  shown 
upon  his  face  and  in  his  word,  and  where  there  had  sounded  a  voice, 
"This  is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased."  There  is  no 
short  road,  there  is  no  easy  path,  there  is  no  compromise  of  the  soul 
that  is  possible  between  the  soul  and  God.  And  every  time,  my 
friends,  that  the  Church  has  tried  to  substitute  for  the  struggle  of  soul 
a  compromise  of  faith,  it  has  enunciated  some  "analogy  of  revealed 
and  natural  religion"  or  some  "limits  of  religious  thought."  It  has 
been  said  that  the  term  "agnostic"  is  the  child  of  Huxley's  brain, 
and  as  such  child  it  has  had  an  honest  and  a  useful  purpose.  But 
there  is  another  agnosticism  that  was  born  of  the  union  of  Butler's 
"Analogy"  and  Mansell's  "Limits  of  Religious  Thought,"  and 
domesticated  itself  under  the  forms  of  religion  and  with  the  usages  of 
faith  within  the  Church  when  it  was  baptized.  That  is  the  agnos- 
ticism that  preserves  the  matrix  of  beliefs,  that  it  may  turn  out  of  it 
the  recurrent  senseless  archaic  phraseology  which  it  never  ceases  to 
rehearse.  The  very  essence  of  personality  is  its  current,  fluent  muta- 
bility. It  knows  perfectly  well  that  God  is,  but  says  with  Chrysos- 
tom,  "  I  know  that  God  is  everywhere,  but  the  how  of  his  being  I  do 
not  know."  It  recognizes  the  diversity  of  faiths,  but  says  with  Saint 
Ambrose,  "Religions  are  many,  but  religion  is  one."  And  every 
now  and  then  we  are  startled  by  the  revenges  that  the  soul  calls  upon 
itself  for  its  own  neglect.  The  strange,  peculiar,  and  unclassified 
phases  of  faith  now  current  and  popular  are  simply  the  soul's  re- 
venge for  its  own  neglect.  Robbed  of  its  ideals,  it  lapses  into  vain 
idolatries. 

We  read  last  winter,  those  of  us,  perhaps,  who  knew  what  was  best  to 
read,  the  Life  and  Letters  of  Leslie  Stephen.  And  when  you  come  to 
the  year  1875  m  tnat  wonderful  volume  in  which  Maitland  has  been 
the  ideal  biographer  of  a  life  that  is  superbly  and  supremely 
interesting,  when  you  come  to  the  year  1875,  y°u  ^d  a  letter  of 
Stephen's  to  our  own  James  Russell  Lowell,  as  the  writer  stands  in  the 
shadow  of  a  great  affliction.  His  wife,  Thackeray's  daughter,  has 
died,  and  he  writes  to  Lowell,  "I  thank — something"  (this  sceptic, 
this  critic,  this  clear-minded  man  who  supposed  he  was  abandoning 
Christianity  when  he  was  leaving  a  national  church), — "I  thank 
something,"  he  says  to  Lowell,  "that  I  loved  her  as  heartily  as  I 
knew  how  to  love,  that  I  would  have  died  for  her  with  pleasure  that  I 


37 

scarcely  ever  saw  a  cloud  upon  her  bright  face."  And  this  Alpine 
rose  blooming  on  the  edges  of  Stephen's  arctic  mind,  this  Alpine 
rose  of  faith  and  emotion, unfolds  a  body  of  divinity.  ''I  thank  some- 
thing," then  that  "something"  is.  "I  loved  her  as  profoundly  as  I 
can  ever  love,"  then  this  "something"  is  the  source  of  the  divine 
affections  which  have  glorified  life.  "That  I  would  have  died  for 
her  with  pleasure,"  then  this  "something"  is  the  inspiration  of  self- 
sacrifice.  "  And  that  I  never  saw  a  cloud  upon  her  bright  face,"  then 
this  law  of  love  and  sacrifice  is  also  the  fountain  of  joy.  And  Leslie 
Stephen,  clear  of  mind  and  whole  of  heart  and  earnest  of  spirit,  comes 
back  upon  the  tides  of  a  great  emotion  to  that  "something"  that  still 
overshadows  him   and  in  whose  shadow  he  sits  and  quiets  himself. 

We  know  perfectly  well  that  the  conditions  of  the  divine  life  cannot 
be  known  to  us  in  their  entirety.  But  we  say  with  that  great  liberal 
whose  bright  example  still  haunts  the  shoresof  life  and  falls  as  radiance 
from  the  heavens  to  which  he  was  so  lately  taken, — we  say  with  Mar- 
tineau,  "  The  possible  always  is,  and  its  categories  of  the  right,  the 
beautiful,  and  the  necessarily  true  may  have  their  contents  defined 
and  wait  for  their  realization  whatever  centuries  may  elapse."  And 
this,  he  adds,  "  is  not  the  work  of  objective  science :  it  is  the  work  of 
sel] -reflection."  It  is  this  transfigured  character,  this  transformed 
man,  that  can  take  upon  his  lips  the  Gloria  with  which  we  began  our 
meeting, — "  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest."  We  know  there  are  vast 
margins  of  being  unexplored,  we  know  that  there  are  riddles  as  yet 
unguessed,  we  know  that  there  are  mysteries  under  the  shadow  of 
which  we  take  our  way,  but  nothing  of  these  things  shall  prevent  us 
from  living  a  great  and  beautiful  life. 

And  just  here  we  come  upon  the  difference  between  the  man  out  in 
search  of  a  religion  and  the  man  whose  heart  is  set  upon  reality. 
The  man  in  search  of  a  religion  inquires  eagerly  of  every  passer-by, 
going  to  most  strange  resorts  of  inquiry  for  the  confirmation  of  his 
search,  asking  on  every  hand,  "Is  there  some  rock  smitten  in  the 
desert  for  the  thirst  of  a  soul  like  mine  ? "  But  the  man  whose 
heart  is  set  upon  reality  goes  into  that  inner  sanctuary  of  his  own 
nature  and  finds  the  kingdom  of  heaven  already  beginning  there. 

And  it  is  for  this  reason  that  respecting  this  great  and  ultimate 
truth  of  religion,  as  of  all  others,  the  liberal  faith  refuses  to  dogma- 
tize.     It  knows  perfectly  well,  as  a  great  European  thinker  said  of 


38 

late,  that  "dogma  is  not  the  book  of  life,  but  its  index";  that  some- 
times, when  it  supposes  that  it  is  struggling  for  its  life,  religion  "  suf- 
fers the  Nemesis  of  finding  that  it  is  only  struggling  to  preserve  this 
index."  It  was  long  ago  said  that  "the  small  and  great,  when  they 
shall  stand  before  God,  shall  be  judged  out  of  the  things  written  in 
the  Book  of  Life."  We  think  they  will  not  be  judged  out  of  what 
is  outlined  as  speculation  in  the  index. 

It  has  been  reserved  for  the  great  heresy  that  began  in  the  fourth 
century  and  continues  to  this  day  to  arrogate  to  itself  the  "indexing" 
of  what  the  soul  may  believe  and  what  it  may  not  believe. 

And  so  we  come  in  this  great  faith  that  we  hold  to  give  glory  to 
God  for  the  achievement  of  our  freedom,  to  give  glory  to  God  for  the 
confidence  of  our  faith,  for  the  fact  that  we  are  fronting  continually 
that  Ultimate  Reality  of  which  it  has  been  well  said  by  the  great  Ger- 
man educator,  Herbart,  that  we  believe  that  it  is,  because,  "where 
nothing  is,  nothing  can  appear,"  and  we  are  not  to  be  misled  by  the 
march  of  phenomena  to  suppose  that  they  are  the  show  of  what  has  no 
existence  behind  them, — phantoms  real  in  a  universe  which  has  no 
final  Reality!  So  with  Browning  we  are  continually  saying,  with 
each  day's  excursion  into  the  unseen,  as  we  shall  say  at  last  when  we 
make  the  beginning  of  the  great  voyage, — 

"  Once  more  I  go  on  my  adventure  brave  and  new, 
Fearless  and  unafraid." 

We  say  with  Emerson,  "Whatever  it  is  that  the  great  Providence 
has  in  reserve  for  us,  it  must  be  something  beautiful  and  in  the  great 
style  of  his  work."    This  is  our  faith. 

And  so  what  better  could  we  say  to-night  in  this  ascription  of  praise 
to  the  great  Author  of  our  being  and  the  Achiever  of  victories  in  us 
and  for  us  than  to  take  up  the  ancient  word  ?  "  O  Eternal,  Thou  hast 
searched  me  and  known  me;  Thou  hast  known  my  downsitting  and 
my  uprising;  Thou  understandest  my  thought  afar  off.  Whither 
shall  I  go  from  Thy  spirit,  and  whither  shall  I  flee  from  Thy  presence  ? 
If  I  ascend  up  into  heaven, Thou  art  there;  if  I  make  my  bed  in  the 
underworld,  behold,  Thou  art  there.  If  I  take  the  wings  of  morning 
and  fly  into  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  sea,  even  there  shall  Thy  hand 
lead  me  and  Thy  right  hand  shall  hold  me."  This  is  the  soul's  con- 
fession to  the  Great  Companion. 


39 

And  so,  matching  this  great  word  of  the  One  Hundred  and  Thirty- 
ninth  Psalm  to  the  words  of  the  Christian  apostle,  we  may  well  say, 
as  a  company  of  believers,  as  children  of  the  living  God: — 

"Now  unto  Him  who  is  able  to  do  exceedingly  abundantly 
above  all  that  we  can  ask  or  think,  according  to  the  power  that 
worketh  in  us,  unto  Him  be  glory  in  the  Church  and  in  Christ  Jesus 
forever.    Amen." 


II.     PEACE    ON    EARTH. 

BY  EDWARD  EVERETT  HALE,  D.D.,  OF  BOSTON,  CHAPLAIN  UNITED 
STATES  SENATE. 

Angels  are  messengers  whose  duty  it  is  to  go  on  God's  errands. 
The  angels  who  sang  "Glory  to  God  in  the  Highest"  also  sang  "on 
earth  peace." 

The  last  session  of  this  International  Congress,  held  two  years  since 
in  the  city  of  Geneva,  was  made  glad  by  the  announcement  of  Peace 
among  the  Nations. 

"  No  war  nor  battle's  sound 
Was  heard  the  world  around." 

It  was  our  good  fortune  in  New  England  that  the  great  Treaty  of 
1905  which  gives  dignity  and  solemnity  to  the  twentieth  century 
was  signed  within  our  borders.  An  island  had  been  found  at  the 
mouth  of  one  of  our  rivers  where  the  etiquettes  of  diplomacy  could 
be  satisfied,  and  the  distinguished  envoys  of  Russia  and  Japan 
could  meet  in  peace  at  the  mediation  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States.  In  the  two  words  "United  States"  there  is  good  omen  for 
the  world's  "united  nations."  As  the  "United-States"  is  one  na- 
tion, the  united  world  is  to  be  one  empire  of  the  living  God.  The 
words  "Thy  kingdom  come,"  repeated  every  morning  in  a  thousand 
million  prayers,  have  their  concrete  and  visible  interpretation.  The 
instinct  of  the  early-born  Church  of  Christ  is  justified  when,  in  the 
prelude  or  overture  to  the  gospel  history,  the  proclamation  which 
follows  the  strain  of  "  Glory  to  God "  is  his  royal  promise  of  peace 
on  earth.       "When    ye  enter   a  house,  wherever  it  may  be,  and 


40 

whosesoever  it  may  be,  north,  south,  east,  or  west,  from  this  moment 
to  the  end  of  time,  ye  shall  salute  it,  saying,  Peace  be  to  this 
house." 

The  prophecy  of  old  centuries  had  called  the  Saviour  of  mankind, 
in  advance  of  his  coming,  by  the  name  of  the  "Prince  of  Peace." 
And  that  Church  which  has  taken  his  name,  though  it  has  but  meanly 
followed  in  his  footsteps,  has  been  glad  to  preserve  the  name  as  its 
noblest  tribute  in  his  honor.  In  ceremony,  in  poetry,  nay,  in  a  sort 
of  faith,  it  calls  him  the  "Prince  of  Peace." 

I  know  very  well,  of  course,  that  the  superficial  people,  the  light- 
weights of  literature  and  of  society,  say  glibly,  "What  are  the  signs 
of  his  coming?"  They  say,  "Of  course,  you  know  men  are 
developed  from  wolves  and  tigers,  and  in  all  human  affairs,  you 
know,  there  must  be  a  drop  of  the  tiger  blood." 

I  had  been  speaking  on  Peace  before  the  professors  of  a  Western 
college,  and  one  of  them,  not  the  professor  of  history,  asked  me 
smartly  why  wars  were  more  and  more  frequent,  why  peace  reigned 
less  and  less.  I  was  able  to  answer  in  a  moment,  "  Because  that  is 
not  true."  In  the  last  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  Ameri- 
can States  were  at  war  nearly  half  the  time.  In  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury they  were  at  war  more  than  a  quarter  of  the  time.  In  the 
eighteenth  century,  which  secured  their  independence,  they  were  at 
war  thirty-seven  years  out  of  a  hundred.  In  the  nineteenth  century 
they  were  at  war  seven  years  in  a  hundred.  As  for  this  professor  and 
for  the  other  light-weights,  I  like  to  refer  them  to  those  chapters  of 
Gibbon  in  which  he  shows  that  under  the  Antonines  and  their  pred- 
ecessors and  successors  the  Roman  Empire  enjoyed  nearly  two 
centuries  of  absolute  peace.  It  had  a  larger  population  than  the 
Europe  of  Gibbon's  time.  It  was  in  those  centuries  that  the  arts  and 
agriculture  and  literature  of  Asia  subdued  barbarous  Europe,  be- 
cause barbarous  Europe  was  at  peace.  The  white  linen  which  puts 
us  in  uniform  this  evening,  the  coats  on  our  backs,  as  we  shall  face 
this  winter's  storms,  would  not  be  known  in  Europe  to-day  but  that 
in  those  two  centuries  of  peace  Europe  learned  from  Asia  the  arts 
by  which  she  clothes  herself. 

The  light-weights  are  apt  to  say  that  God  is  on  the  side  of  the 
strongest  battalions, — which  is  probably  true.  But,  as  has  been  well 
observed,  success  waits  not  on  the  strength  of    battalions,  but  on 


4i 

Justice,  Truth,  Honor,  and  Union.  And  it  is  quite  certain  that  God 
is  with  them. 

Justice  brings  in  peace :  peace  follows  justice.  That  is  the  gospel 
of  the  beginning;  it  is  the  gospel  of  to-day;  it  is  the  gospel  of  the 
future.  You  and  I  need  not  distress  ourselves  about  gunpowder  and 
torpedoes  and  the  apparatus  of  war.  This  is  no  question  of  dropping 
a  spark  upon  gunpowder  or  the  striking  a  blow  upon  dynamite. 
We  know  perfectly  well  what  the  machinery  of  war  means.  Some 
of  us  are  old  enough  to  remember  the  end  of  the  Civil  War,  and  we 
know  perfectly  well  that  every  weapon  used  at  the  end  of  the  Civil 
War,  by  sea  or  by  land,  is  now  rusting  in  the  rubbish  heap.  Not  one 
weapon  of  them  all,  from  the  great  frigates  down  to  the  small  swords, 
would  be  of  use  in  any  warfare.  And  we  know  perfectly  well  that 
the  "  Dreadnoughts  "  and  the  torpedoes,  these  things  on  which  we  are 
spending  a  few  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  every  year,  will  all 
be  in  the  waste  heap  before  the  next  forty  years  have  gone  by.  Things 
always  perish:  the  idea  is  eternal.  "Glory  to  God  in  the  highest, 
peace  on  earth,  and  good  will  among  men."  That  is  the  lesson  which 
at  this  moment  the  United  States  of  America  has  for  its  business  to 
proclaim  to  the  united  nations  of  the  world. 

Now  our  new  century  is  to  be  not  so  much  the  century  of  physical 
invention,  not  so  much  the  century  of  territorial  discovery,  as  the  cen- 
tury of  the  reign  of  Ideas.  Man,  the  child  of  God,  has  found  out  that 
he  is  the  child  of  God,  and  he  means  that  God's  kingdom  shall  come. 
Man  works  with  God  and  God  with  man,  that  the  will  of  God  may 
be  done  on  earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven.  In  a  world  thus  governed 
the  nations  of  the  world  have  met  at  The  Hague  in  one  congress. 
Congress,  a  place  to  which  men  go  together.  They  have  consulted  to- 
gether for  the  first  time.  They  are  consulting  together,  have  been 
to-day,  will  be  to-morrow.  They  are  consulting,  not  how  this  na- 
tion shall  be  stronger,  not  how  that  nation  shall  be  made  weaker, 
but  how  all  the  nations,  great  and  small,  may  live  together  in  peace, 
how  this  world  shall  be  one  world.  "As  Thou,  Father,  art  in  me  and 
I  in  Thee,  that  they  may  be  perfected  into  one." 

Really,  it  is  enough  to  know  that  the  distinguished  men  who  ade- 
quately represent  the  nations  of  the  world,  great  and  small,  are  for 
the  first  time  together.  One  might  say  that  for  a  beginning  this  is 
enough.     The  nations  look  each  other  in  the  face,  and  yet  they  are 


42 

not  on  the  field  of  battle.  The  nations  look  each  other  in  the  face, 
and  ask  each  other  how  they  can  make  a  closer  union.  Might  there 
be  one  august  tribunal  which  should  represent  the  wisdom,  the  his- 
tory, the  religion  of  the  world,  and  which  should  be  able  to  issue  its 
decisions,  yes  or  no,  in  the  great  crises  of  the  history  of  the  world  ? 

Our  friends  from  the  older  continent,  so  called,  as  they  arrive  in 
America  (which,  the  geologists  tell  us,  is  the  oldest  continent  of  all), 
will  find  that  we  are  united,  absolutely  united  in  one  determination, 
that  war  shall  cease  and  peace  shall  take  its  place!  We  remember 
our  own  name, — that  this  nation  is  called  the  nation  of  the  United 
States.  Our  fathers  highly  resolved  that,  when  these  States  differed 
from  each  other,  as  they  would  differ,  they  should  refer  their  differ- 
ences to  one  supreme  tribunal.  This  tribunal  shall  proclaim  the 
difference  between  right  and  wrong.  Questions  of  boundary,  ques- 
tions of  language,  questions  of  trade,  questions  of  race,  should  be 
referred  to  the  supreme  tribunal.  Our  fathers  determined  on  this. 
And  to  this  the  United  States  agrees.  If  it  needed  a  lesson,  it  learned 
its  lesson  in  its  one  great  failure;  and  even  there  and  then  the  power 
of  union,  "  that  they  all  may  be  one,  as  Thou,  Father,  art  in  me  and  I 
in  Thee,"  prevailed.  The  United  States  of  America  is  the  great 
peace  society  of  the  world. 

The  United  States  of  America  proposes  in  this  first  decade  of  a 
new  century  that  the  nations  of  the  world,  if  they  stand  for  life  in- 
stead of  death,  for  heaven  instead  of  hell,  for  right  instead  of  wrong, 
shall  unite  just  as  these  States  have  united.  Absolute  freedom  to 
the  individual,  absolute  self-rule  in  the  smallest  communities,  abso- 
lute self-government  in  every  historical  State,  but  Unity,  Union, 
Harmony,  and  mutual  life,  blending  all  the  nations  of  civilization 
in  one.  Harmony  instead  of  discord,  union  for  disunion, — a  com- 
mon life;  in  place  of  contest  and  jealousy,  the  reign  of  peace.  We 
will  establish  Justice,  and  Peace  shall  follow. 

"Traveller,  lol  the  Prince  of  Peace, 
Lo!  the  Son  of  God  is  come." 


43 


III.    GOOD  WILL   TO   MEN. 

BY  DR.  BOOKER  T.  WASHINGTON,  PRINCIPAL  OF  TUSKEGEE 
INSTITUTE,   ALABAMA. 

I  have  been  a  slave  in  body,  and  know  its  meaning,  but  there  is 
no  form  of  physical  slavery  that  is  as  hurtful  as  mental  and  spiritual 
slavery.  Having,  therefore,  experienced  one  form  of  bondage,  I 
have  long  since  registered  a  high  and,  I  trust,  holy  resolve  in  heaven 
that  henceforward  no  influence  shall  enslave  me  in  mind  or  in  heart. 
Hence  as  an  ex-slave  and  as  an  American  citizen,  I  count  it  a  high 
privilege  to  be  permitted  to  share  in  the  duty  of  extending  a  welcome 
to  those  who  have  come  here  from  this  and  foreign  lands  to  attend 
this  International  Council  of  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers. 

My  first  introduction  to  the  world  of  religious  thought  was  in  this 
wise:  one  morning,  before  the  break  of  day,  just  prior  to  her  de- 
parture for  the  work  of  the  day,  I  recall  the  picture  of  my  now  sainted 
mother  bending  over  my  body  as  I  lay  upon  a  dirt  floor,  wrapped  in  a 
bundle  of  rags,  earnestly  praying  that  Abraham  Lincoln  might  suc- 
ceed, and  that  one  day  she  and  her  boy  might  be  free.  I  am  here 
to-night  to  celebrate  with  you  the  answer  to  that  prayer.  I  join  all 
the  more  heartily  in  this  festival  of  religious  freedom  of  thought  and 
activity  because  my  race  in  America,  as  has  been  true  of  the  oppressed 
in  all  lands,  owes  a  peculiar  debt  of  gratitude  to  those  of  the  liberal 
faith. 

When  fire  comes  into  contact  with  dynamite  or  powder,  something 
happens.  The  two  cannot  dwell  together  in  peace,  and,  when  the 
religion  that  is  pure  and  undefiled  comes  into  contact  with  slavery, 
oppression,  and  ignorance,  something  always  happens.  The  two 
cannot  dwell  together  in  peace.  So,  when  the  experiment  was  tried 
of  having  great  souls  of  the  liberal  faith  inhabit  the  same  country 
with  slavery,  the  outcome  was  failure.  Slavery,  with  its  results, 
could  not  live  in  the  same  country  and  in  peace  by  the  side  of  Abra- 
ham Lincoln,  James  Russell  Lowell,  Henry  Wadsworth  Longfellow, 
John  Greenleaf  Whittier,  William  Lloyd  Garrison,  Wendell  Phillips, 
Theodore  Parker,  George  William  Curtis,  William  Ellery  Channing, 
James  Freeman  Clarke,  and  our  own  living  saint  and  sage,  Edward 


44 

Everett  Hale.  I  repeat  that,  when  slavery  touched  these  great  souls, 
something  happened;  and  the  institution  of  human  slavery  was  for- 
ever banished  from  our  land,  and  the  world  was  convinced  anew  that 
it  was  impossible  for  human  bondage  and  oppression  to  dwell  in  peace 
in  the  same  land  with  education  and  religious  freedom. 

If  I  correctly  understand  the  meaning  and  object  of  this  great  in- 
ternational gathering  of  spiritual  thinkers  and  leaders,  it  is  to  im- 
press upon  the  world  the  fact  that  religion  is  not  meant  to  estrange 
men  and  races,  but  to  acquaint  each  with  the  best  that  is  in  the  other 
and  to  unite  them  in  a  common  bond  of  service.  This  you  will  do 
with  all  men,  no  matter  what  tongue  they  speak  or  in  what  land 
they  dwell  or  to  what  race  they  belong. 

If  I  interpret  correctly  the  spirit  of  this  international  and  inter- 
denominational organization,  it  is  to  impress  upon  mankind  the  old 
and  fundamental  truth  that  there  is  something  in  religion,  something 
in  the  end  at  which  it  aims,  that  is  far  above  church,  name,  creed,  or 
dogma;  something  that  transcends  in  importance  denominational 
statistics  or  church  wealth.  You  would  concern  yourself  with  the 
vital  things  of  religion,  you  would  follow  the  teachings  of  the  Great 
Book  when  it  says,  in  effect,  "Not  by  power  nor  by  might,  but  by 
my  spirit  shall  the  world  be  redeemed."  You  would  put  not  a  mere 
name,  not  a  mere  formula,  but  the  spirit  of  Christ  into  every  human 
being.  It  often  requires,  it  seems  to  me,  a  great  crisis  in  the  affairs 
of  races  and  nations  to  teach  us  how  to  rise  above  all  that  is  little  and 
narrowing  in  our  religious  life.  Within  our  country  and  within 
recent  years  we  have  had  two  such  great  lessons.  The  one  was  during 
the  time  that  the  great  battle  was  raging  between  slavery  and  free- 
dom, between  union  and  the  proposed  disruption  of  the  nation.  The 
other  lesson  came,  as  a  result  of  the  war,  when  millions  of  ignorant 
and  poverty-stricken  negroes  were  suddenly  made  citizens  and  re- 
quired protection  and  education.  On  each  of  these  supreme  occa- 
sions men  and  women  lifted  themselves  into  the  atmosphere  of  Chris- 
tian brotherhood  and  united  Christian  service,  where  all  was  forgotten 
save  the  spirit  of  the  Master  and  the  essentials  of  true  religion.  If 
this  can  be  done  once,  it  can  be  done  again.  In  this  connection 
may  I  suggest,  to  the  credit  of  American  Unitarians,  that  they 
always  stand  ready  to  sacrifice  the  reward  for  work  that  shows  itself 
merely  in  increased  church  plants,  denominational  numbers,  and 


45 

financial  statistics,  in  order  that  they  may  perform  the  higher  work 
of  spreading  the  spirit  of  service  and  religious  freedom  and  tolera- 
tion: hence  it  is  that  Unitarians  are  likely  to  find  more  evidences  of 
the  fruit  of  their  efforts  outside  of  their  immediate  church  circles  than 
within  them. 

I  do  not  speak  to  you  as  a  pessimist.  Far  from  that.  My  observa- 
tion and  experience  firmly  convince  me  that  the  spread  of  religion  is 
making  the  world  better  and  lifting  mankind  up  to  a  higher  plane  of 
living.  The  world  is  going  forward,  not  backward.  Until  some  one 
is  able  to  invent  and  enforce  a  law  which  will  stop  the  progress  of  the 
civilization  of  the  world,  the  forces  of  righteousness  and  justice  need 
have  no  fear  of  defeat.  Your  work  of  spreading,  defending,  and 
vitalizing  religious  thought  and  effort  is  not  in  vain.  Christian 
civilization  is  moving  forward,  not  halting  or  retrograding,  and  no 
one  is  in  a  better  position  to  realize  this  than  one  who  belongs,  as  I 
do,  to  what  is  known  as  one  of  the  unpopular  or  disadvantaged  races. 
It  is  a  long  step  from  a  Virginia  slave  plantation  to  the  platform 
upon  which  I  speak  to-night.  This  fact  of  my  personal  experience 
gives  me  the  right  to  say  and  repeat,  Your  work  is  not  in  vain.  In 
America  and  in  all  countries  the  spirit  of  the  Master  is  slowly  enter- 
ing all  the  problems  that  relate  to  justice  and  fair  play.  This  is  so 
in  regard  to  the  great  problems  of  labor  and  capital,  of  education, 
and  the  adjustment  of  the  relations  of  race  to  race,  in  the  securing 
to  all  the  important  but  sure  protection  and  encouragement  of  the 
law. 

We  have  a  potent  example  of  this  progress  in  the  case  of  more  than 
ten  million  negroes  in  America  who,  in  about  forty  years,  in  the  face 
of  difficulties,  have  accumulated  more  than  $350,000,000  worth  of 
taxable  property,  who  have  acquired  nearly  half  a  million  homes  and 
farms,  who  have  moved  forward  to  the  extent  that  56  per  cent,  can 
read  and  write  the  English  language,  who  have  16,000  Christian 
ministers  and  24,000  church  organizations  with  $27,000,000  worth 
of  church  property.  In  this  connection  I  want  the  world  to  know 
that  the  educated  negro  is  not  a  rapist,  and  is  rarely  a  criminal  of  any 
character. 

In  the  solution  of  all  these  great  questions  we  are  far  from  perfec- 
tion, and  wrong  and  injustice  still  exist,  and  much  serious  work  re- 
mains before  the  right  shall  completely  triumph.     For  one,  I  like 


46 

a  hard,  serious,  and  perplexing  problem  at  which  to  work.  For  my- 
self, I  would  not  care  to  live  in  an  age  where  there  was  no  hard  prob- 
lem to  be  solved  or  weak  portion  of  the  human  family  to  be  reached 
and  lifted  up. 

In  proportion  as  we  reach  down  and  lift  up  the  weakest,  we  our- 
selves are  made  strong.  In  the  degree  that  we  mete  out  injustice 
to  the  humblest  and  weakest,  in  like  degree  are  we  degraded  and 
weakened. 

In  our  haste  and  shortness  of  vision  we  are  often  too  prone  to  de- 
pend upon  the  passing  of  statutory  laws  to  settle  serious  problems. 
The  most  fundamental  and  vital  things  of  life  are  above  and  beyond 
the  control  of  statutory  laws. 

You  remember  Saint  Paul's  letter  to  the  Galatians  in  which  he 
says,  "But  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  long-suffering,  gentle- 
ness, goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance."  And  then  Saint 
Paul  adds  these  pregnant  words,  "Against  such  there  is  no  law." 
It  is  away  up  in  Saint  Paul's  atmosphere,  above  the  reach  of  man, 
where  your  race,  my  race,  and  all  races  are  to  look  for  the  final 
solving  of  all  the  perplexing  questions  of  the  earth. 

Let  me,  again,  in  the  name  of  my  race,  our  whole  country,  bid  you 
welcome  and  God-speed  in  your  mission  of  spreading  religious  free- 
dom and  truth,  and  knitting  together  all  the  people  of  the  earth  in 
a  common  bond  of  brotherhood  and  service.  Such  gatherings  as 
this  are  helping  to  hasten  the  day  referred  to  by  Christ  when  he  said, 
"  You  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free." 

If  in  the  midst  of  denominational  rivalry  and  bigotry,  and  if  in 
the  midst  of  racial  pride  and  selfishness,  and  if  in  the  midst  of  national 
ambition  and  desire  for  power,  if  for  a  short  season  the  progress  of 
the  world  seems  to  halt  or  slacken,  let  us  not  grow  discouraged  or 
faithless  or  lose  hope  in  our  task,  but  at  all  times  be  ready  to  ex- 
claim with  one  of  old, — 

"The  stormy  billows  are  high, 

Their  fury  is  mighty,  but 
The  Lord  is  above  them,  and 

Is  almighty  and  almighty." 

And  He  will  hasten  the  coming  of  the  day  when  there  will  be  good 
will  toward  all  men. 


47 


FIRST  GENERAL  SESSION  OF  THE  INTERNA- 
TIONAL CONGRESS. 

Held  at  Tremont  Temple,  Boston,  Tuesday  morning,  September  24. 

The  Congress  met  at  10  a.m.,  Rev.  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  in  the 
chair. 

The  exercises  opened  with  the  singing  of  a  hymn  written  for  the 
occasion  by  Rev.  Seth  C.  Beach,  D.D.,  Scripture  reading  and 
prayer  by  Rev.  Henry  Rawlings,  of  London,  England. 

HYMN. 

BY    SETH   C.    BEACH. 

Kingdom  of  God!  the  day  how  blest, 

When  to  Thy  fold  as  to  their  home, 
From  north  and  south,  from  east  and  west, 

Thine  own  of  every  name  shall  come  1 

Day  of  the  Lord!  Thine  hour  draws  nigh, 

We  see  the  radiant  dawn  afar; 
The  light  of  truth  illumes  the  sky, 

Resplendent  as  the  morning  star. 

Not  ours  the  noon,  but  ours  the  dawn, 

The  prelude  to  the  full-orbed  day; 
And  ours  to  bid  the  clouds  be  gone, 

And  give  the  light  unhindered  way. 

All  glory,  gracious  God,  to  Thee! 

We  lift  our  eyes  unto  the  hills, 
And,  lo!  the  blessed  prophecy, 

By  Thy  strong  arm,  its  course  fulfils. 

Rev.  George  Batchelor,  Professor  Jean  Reville,  and  Rev.  W.  Cope- 
land  Bowie  were  appointed  a  Nominating  Committee,  and  it  was 
announced  that  any  business  introduced  would  go  without  discussion 
to  the  Executive  Committee. 


48 


OPENING   ADDRESS   OF   THE    PRESIDENT, 
REV.   SAMUEL   A.    ELIOT,   D.D. 

The  significance  of  this  gathering  is  that  it  is  composed  of  men  and 
women  who  in  the  pursuit  of  truth  and  righteousness  dare  to  com- 
mit themselves  unreservedly  to  the  control  of  the  law  of  liberty. 
This  Council  is  the  unfettered  servant  of  truth,  freedom,  and  brother- 
hood. The  type  of  religious  thought  and  feeling  represented  here  is 
broadly  inclusive.  It  is  not  to  be  identified  with  any  one  form  of 
sectarian  opinion  or  organization.  The  universal  religious  con- 
sciousness creates  here  a  meeting-place  for  a  score  of  different  races, 
traditions,  doctrines,  names,  and  allegiances. 

The  intellectual  characteristic  of  this  company  is  open-mindedness. 
We  do  not  desire  to  promote  uniformity  of  opinion.  We  are  no  one- 
ideaed  regiment,  marching  with  the  dull  monotony  of  a  hayfoot- 
strawfoot  discipline.  We  are  a  persistently  independent  and  self- 
reliant  people,  tolerant  of  exceptionality,  eager  to  recognize  and  apply 
individual  power  and  aptitude.  We  rejoice  that  in  this  gathering 
lonely  thinkers  find  themselves  least  lonely  and  brave  workers  find 
themselves  most  positively  furthered. 

We  come  together  out  of  our  separate  and  peculiar  traditions,  our 
local  or  provincial  prejudices,  our  legitimate  preferences  for  certain 
familiar  beliefs  and  habits.  We  come  with  our  little  sectarian 
jealousies,  our  misunderstandings,  our  possible  antipathies,  and  we 
discover  that  our  very  differences  represent  not  so  much  the  diversities 
as  the  universality  of  religious  faith.  Here  we  come  into  the  atmos- 
phere of  cordial  fellowship  and  good  will.  We  lay  aside  our  nar- 
rower pursuits,  the  ambitions  that  divide  us,  the  cares  and  fears 
that  so  easily  beset  us,  and  refresh  ourselves  with  a  nobler  reach  of 
vision.  We  meet  for  social  intercourse  and  for  the  exchange  of  opin- 
ion and  experience.  We  enjoy  the  stimulus  of  intellectual  variety, 
we  broaden  our  horizons,  we  lift  our  instinctive  prepossessions  to  the 
higher  levels  of  rational  and  friendly  debate.  We  form  enduring 
friendships.    We  discover  unexpected  identities  of  spirit  and  pur- 


49 

pose.  We  learn  how  much  of  breadth  and  true  liberality  there  is  in 
nations  or  communions  we  had  supposed  to  be  exclusive  and  des- 
potic. We  emphasize  the  convictions  that  all  good  men  hold  in 
common.  We  unseal  again  the  fountains  of  idealism  where  the  thirsty 
soul,  weary  of  materialism,  has  so  often  refreshed  itself.  We  renew 
faith  and  courage,  and  we  return  to  our  homes  re-enforced  by  a  new 
sense  of  the  grandeur  of  our  life  together  and  the  irresistible  attrac- 
tion of  our  common  hopes  and  ideals. 

But,  while  thus  inclusive  and  hospitable,  the  field  of  this  Council, 
as  I  understand  it,  is  not  unlimited.  It  is  confined  by  the  boun- 
daries of  religious  thought  and  action,  and  it  is  practically  limited  to 
the  people  who  believe  that  theology  is  a  progressive  science,  and  not  a 
sealed  and  final  "deposit  of  faith."  It  commands  primarily  the  alle- 
giance of  people  to  whom  religion  is  not  a  matter  of  outward  form  or 
stated  observance,  but  a  sentiment  which  expresses  itself  in  unpre- 
tending devotion  to  the  truth,  in  habitual  consideration  for  others,  in 
steady  adherence  to  certain  well-recognized  ideals  of  private  and 
public  duty. 

It  is  a  commonplace  to  say  that  immense  changes  are  taking  place 
in  the  thought  and  life  of  all  religious  organizations.  The  adherents 
of  the  different  communions  are  no  longer  homogeneous.  They  not 
only  tolerate,  but  acknowledge  a  great  and  growing  diversity  of  opinion 
within  their  own  ranks.  To  say  that  a  man  is  an  Episcopalian  or  a 
Presbyterian,  a  Lutheran  or  a  Calvinist,  a  Catholic  or  Protestant  or 
Jew,  no  longer  defines  his  spirit  or  his  convictions.  He  may  be  for- 
ward-looking or  backward-looking,  conservative  or  progressive,  bound 
by  some  outward  law  of  constraint  or  delivered  into  allegiance  to  the 
law  of  liberty.  The  progressive  men  of  all  communions  feel  them- 
selves in  closer  sympathy  with  men  of  the  same  spirit  in  other  com- 
munions than  with  those  of  an  opposite  temper  in  their  own,  while 
the  reactionaries  of  all  communions  are  drawn  together  by  their 
common  opposition  to  the  theological  reconstruction  which  modern 
knowledge  demands.  The  traditional  and  historic  dividing-lines 
grow  dim,  but  the  new  alignments  grow  more  and  more  distinct. 
As  the  progressives  of  every  name  carry  forward  their  principles  to 
their  logical  conclusions,  the  reactionaries  relapse  toward  medievalism 
In  their  doctrines,  their  habits  of  worship,  and  their  conceptions  of 
the  religious  life.     The  members  of  this  Council  obviously  belong 


5o 

to  the  progressive  wings  of  the  different  communions.  We  are  a 
people  who  hold  it  to  be  the  task  of  each  generation  to  interpret 
religion  afresh  in  the  light  of  growing  knowledge  and  experience 
and  in  the  thought  and  speech  of  their  own  time.  We  are  a  people 
temperamentally  disposed  to  accept  modern  conceptions  of  history, 
science,  and  philosophy. 

But,  while  the  members  of  this  Council  are  liberals,  they  are  in  no 
sense  iconoclasts.  They  cherish  the  law  of  historic  continuity. 
They  have  no  tendency  to  mistake  restlessness  for  progress,  or  revo- 
lution for  reform,  or  the  removal  of  their  neighbor's  landmarks  for 
the  enlargement  of  their  own  territory.  They  believe  that  to  develop 
a  nobler  future  we  must  use  the  impulse  of  the  toiling  generations 
behind  us.  Amidst  the  diversities  of  gift  and  operation  they  seek 
to  discern  the  one  spirit.  Reaching  for  things  before,  they  hold  se- 
curely to  something  behind. 

There  is  nothing  controversial  in  the  purpose  of  this  gathering, 
there  is  nothing  polemic  in  our  discussions.  Though  the  statement  of 
our  principles  appears  sometimes  to  arouse  heat  in  those  who  do  not 
agree  with  us,  we  disclaim  any  desire  to  criticise  or  inflame.  Our 
appeal  is  never  to  passion  or  prejudice,  but  to  reason  and  good  will. 
Our  attention  is  not  given  to  the  defects  or  failures  of  other  systems 
of  religious  thought  or  methods  of  religious  organization,  but  solely 
to  the  development  of  the  creative  and  constructive  forces.  We  are 
concerned  with  the  promotion  of  certain  positive  and  universal  prin- 
ciples of  thought  and  conduct.  Our  spirit  is  affirmative,  not  nega- 
tive.    We  desire  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil. 

And,  if  we  are  not  iconoclasts  or  controversialists,  neither  are  we 
apologists.  The  great  convictions  we  hold  in  common  rest  not  on 
the  authentication  of  any  ancient  book,  not  on  any  decree  of  Council 
or  of  Church,  but  on  their  appeal  to  the  conscience,  reason,  and  ex- 
perience of  men.  We  make  no  unreal  distinction  between  religion 
and  the  world,  between  things  sacred  and  things  secular.  Religion, 
as  we  conceive  it,  is  not  something  apart  from  life,  dependent  upon 
a  special  and  supernatural  revelation,  but  a  part  of  life,  simply  the 
consummation  and  transfiguration  of  human  experience. 

It  follows  that  the  members  of  this  Council  are,  by  temperamental 
necessity,  optimists.  They  believe  in  human  nature,  they  have  con- 
fidence in  the  good  purposes  of  the  universe,  they  commit  themselves 


to  unfaltering  trust  in  the  ultimate  victory  of  truth  over  error  and  of 
right  over  wrong.  They  are  people  who  squarely  face  the  unquestion- 
able and  inscrutable  tragedies  of  human  life,  who  have  a  clear  per- 
ception of  the  narrow  boundaries  of  human  knowledge  and  the  evils 
and  ills  that  oppress  and  hinder  mankind.  They  do  not  expect  to 
fathom  the  unfathomable,  yet  they  find  ample  scope,  within  the 
obvious  limits,  for  the  exercise  of  noble  faculties,  for  flights  of  fine 
imagination,  for  disinterested  and  prophetic  achievement.  They 
discover  no  limits  to  the  possibilities  of  the  soul's  expansion.  They 
believe  in  spite  of  prevalent  discontent,  in  spite  of  disappointment 
over  some  of  the  results  of  liberty,  in  spite  of  the  inability  of  science 
to  solve  the  ultimate  mystery  of  existence,  that  life  is  eminently  worth 
living  and  that  underneath  are  the  everlasting  arms. 

The  leaders  of  this  Council  do  not  deceive  themselves  into  thinking 
that  their  ideals  are  easily  attained  or  to  be  immediately  realized. 
Theirs  is  the  joy  of  pursuing  ideals  that  ever  journey  before  them. 
Their  good  obtained  is  only  tidings  of  something  better.  Their 
castles  of  hope  shine  ever  along  new  horizons.  They  rejoice  in  a 
religious  confidence  which  is  allied  to,  and  not  at  war  with,  the  funda- 
mental instincts  of  honor  and  justice,  which  is  in  harmony  with  the 
beauty  of  the  visible  universe  and  with  the  sweetness  of  family  love. 
Theirs  is  the  cheerful  faith  that  knows  that  this  marvellous  life  is 
not  a  vision  that  fades,  but  an  everlasting  trust.  Such  a  faith  jus- 
tifies an  illimitable  expectation.  The  potential  kingdom  of  God 
and  brotherhood  of  man  is  here.  In  modest  confidence,  let  us 
pledge  ourselves  to  our  high  calling,  resolved  to  do  what  we  can  that 
freedom  and  truth  may  more  abound,  that  men  may  have  life,  and 
have  it  more  abundantly. 

Brethren  of  the  Liberal  Faith,  our  greeting  is  no  empty  form,  no 
merely  personal  word,  no  conventional  welcome.  It  is  full  of  proud 
and  happy  memories,  of  bright  hopes,  of  inspiring  challenge  to  new 
courage  and  loyalty.  To  greet  you,  we  gather  the  spirits  of  the  great 
departed.  Search  the  careers  of  the  men  whose  names  are  inscribed 
on  these  walls,  and  you  will  find  that  they  were  animated  by  the  ideals 
to  which  this  gathering  is  pledged.  These  names  materialize  them- 
selves into  the  forms  of  the  Prophets  and  Poets,  the  Scholars,  States- 
men, and  Seers  we  have  loved  to  honor  and  obey.     These  were  men 


52 

who  refused  to  believe  that  God  has  exhausted  his  creative  energies; 
men  who  gave  themselves  not  to  any  material  end  or  transient  object, 
but  to  quickening  the  primal  influences  by  which  character  is  moulded 
and  truth  perfected  and  life  made  more  abundant;  men  who  de- 
serted no  righteous  cause  because  it  is  unpopular;  men  whose 
chosen  way  was  freedom,  whose  end  was  righteousness,  brother- 
hood, and  truth.  These  were  men  who  dared  after  the  way  called 
heresy  to  worship  the  God  of  their  fathers;  men  who  followed  the 
truth  that  made  them  free,  who  cherished  the  love  of  God  and  man 
that  it  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law;  men  who  mightily  believed  and 
wrought,  that  the  unity  of  the  spirit  which  is  the  bond  of  peace  might 
be  made  real  on  earth. 

If  this  silent  band  of  heroes  could  speak  to  us,  who  can  doubt 
what  their  questions  would  be  ?  They  would  ask  us  what  use  we 
were  making  of  the  freedom  they  won  for  us.  They  would  ask  if 
the  blessings  of  religious  liberty  were  now  the  common  possession 
of  the  people.  They  would  ask  if  freedom  had,  as  they  believed  it 
would,  led  on  to  brotherhood  and  unity  and  honorable  serviceable- 
ness.  What  answer  can  we  make  to  such  questions?  Is  our  an- 
swer nothing  more  than  an  excuse  for  our  own  insufficiency? 
Have  we  been  true  to  the  trust  they  left  to  us?  It  is  for  us  to 
determine  whether  these  names  shall  abide  among  the  immortals. 
It  is  for  us  to  perpetuate  their  principles  and  unfalteringly  to  pursue 
the  ideals  they  have  set  before  us. 

Thus  do  pioneers  of  pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty  greet  you  to- 
day,— in  the  words  of  the  elder  prophets  that  still  ring  down  the 
ages,  —  "Arise,  shine,  for  thy  light  is  come,  and  the  glory  of  the 
Lord  has  risen  upon  you!" 

The  President. — I  spoke  just  now  of  the  "modest  confidence" 
that  animates  the  leaders  of  this  Council.  What  a  pale  and  in- 
adequate phrase  that  is  to  describe  the  buoyant,  inspiring  optimism 
of  the  Secretary  of  this  Council!  Mr.  Wendte  is  a  fountain  of  inge- 
nuity, resourcefulness,  and  fertilizing  imagination.  You  know  these 
things,  but  you  do  not  know  as  I  do  the  amount  of  hard,  patient 
daily  work  that  he  has  put  into  this  thing  for  the  last  seven  years. 
I  present  to  you  the  Secretary  of  the  International  Council. 


REV.  SAMUEL  A.  ELIOT,  D.D. 

President  of  the  Boston  International  Congress  of 
Religious  Liberals,  1907 


53 


REPORT  OF  THE   EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE   OF 
THE  INTERNATIONAL   COUNCIL. 

PRESENTED  BY  REV.  CHARLES  W.  WENDTE,  OF  BOSTON,  GENERAL 

SECRETARY. 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  International  Council  of  Uni- 
tarian and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers,  under 
whose  general  auspices  these  international  meetings  of  religious 
liberals  are  held,  heartily  greets  its  members  and  friends  assembled 
for  the  fourth  time  in  conference.  It  congratulates  them  that 
through  the  hospitable  invitation  of  their  American  fellow-workers 
they  are  enabled  to  hold  a  congress  on  American  soil  and  in  the 
very  city  where  our  International  Council  itself  was  born  seven 
years  ago.  We  meet  to-day  in  a  community  identified  in  the  world's 
esteem  with  civil  and  religious  liberty,  and  with  which  the  life  and 
labors  of  Dr.  William  Ellery  Channing,  Theodore  Parker,  Ralph 
Waldo  Emerson,  Hosea  Ballou,  John  Greenleaf  Whittier,  Phillips 
Brooks,  and  other  eminent  advocates  of  religious  enlightenment 
and  freedom  were  long  associated.  The  generous  activity  and 
large  plans  of  the  Boston  committee  for  the  entertainment  and 
work  of  the  Congress  assure  a  series  of  meetings  of  remarkable 
scope  and  interest,  whose  influence  cannot  fail  to  be  of  enduring 
advantage  to  the  cause  of  "  pure  religion  "  held  in  the  spirit  of  "  per- 
fect liberty." 

The  Executive  Committee  congratulates  you  on  the  general  in- 
crease and  inspiring  promise  of  this  movement  for  the  federation 
of  the  religious  liberals  of  all  lands.  Organized  in  Boston  in  the 
year  1900  by  a  few  earnest  spirits  representing  half  a  dozen  of  the 
more  advanced  church  fellowships  of  Christendom,  its  founders 
could  not  foresee  its  timeliness  and  adaptation  to  the  needs  of  the 
liberal  religious  community  throughout  the  world.  With  faith  and 
hope  they  sowed  the  seed  of  religious  enlightenment  and  fraternity 
in  the  dawning  light  of  the  new  century,  and  have  been  rewarded 


54 

beyond  their  most  ardent  expectations  by  its  surprising  growth  and 
early  fruition.  At  our  Congress  to-day  are  assembled  the  repre- 
sentatives of  four  of  the  great  world-religions;  namely,  Judaism, 
Christianity,  the  Theism  of  India,  and  Mohammedanism.  Men 
and  women  of  4  distinct  races  and  16  different  nationalities  par- 
ticipate in  it.  The  members  of  33  separate  church  fellowships  will 
address  us,  and  88  religious  associations,  other  than  single  churches, 
have  sent  us  official  delegates.  If  we  were  to  take  into  considera- 
tion the  church  affiliations  of  the  106  honorary  Vice-Presidents  who 
have  cordially  permitted  us  to  affix  their  names  to  the  invitation  to 
this  Congress,  our  exhibit  of  sympathizers  and  friends  would  be  still 
larger.  2391  persons  have  enrolled  themselves  as  members  of  the 
Boston  Congress,  paying  the  Congress  fee.  A  still  larger  number 
of  persons  will  attend  its  various  sessions.  Of  these  172  belong 
to  foreign,  mostly  European  countries.  122  delegates  from  Great 
Britain  are  in  attendance  on  the  Congress,  while  the  religious 
liberals  of  Austria,  Denmark,  France,  Germany,  Holland,  Hungary, 
Italy,  Sweden,  and  Switzerland,  as  well  as  Australia,  New  Zealand,. 
India,  and  Japan,  are  also,  and  for  the  most  part  officially,  repre- 
sented. 

Such  results  may  well  encourage  the  promoters  of  this  international 
endeavor  to  bring  into  closer  union  for  exchange  of  ideas,  mutual 
service,  and  the  promotion  of  their  common  aims  the  historic  lib- 
eral churches,  the  liberal  elements  in  all  churches,  the  scattered 
liberal  congregations,  and  isolated  workers  for  religious  freedom  and 
progress  in  many  lands. 

This  purpose  is  being  more  and  more  realized  as  each  successive 
meeting  of  our  association  brings  the  religious  liberals  of  different 
nations  into  closer  personal  relations  with  each  other.  Our  pre- 
vious Congresses  at  London,  Amsterdam,  and  Geneva  were  impres- 
sive in  their  exhibit  of  numbers,  the  intellectual  and  moral  weight 
of  their  testimony,  and  the  catholicity  of  their  spirit.  To  all  who 
attended  them  they  were  profoundly  instructive  and  moving, — red- 
letter  days  in  their  spiritual  history.  But  the  best  result  of  these 
Congresses  was  the  brotherhood  of  soul  which  they  generated,  the 
mutual  personal  acquaintance  of  thinkers  and  workers  for  religious 
freedom,  separated  from  each  other  by  long  stretches  of  sea  and 
land,  but  closely  affiliated  in  thought,  in  sentiment,  in  aspiration. 


55 

and  in  common  labors  for  the  advancement  of  truth  and  the  practice 
of  the  good.  Whatever  else  this  International  Council  may  have 
accomplished,  it  has  certainly  brought  the  advocates  of  religious 
freedom  in  many  lands  into  closer  touch  and  acquaintance  with 
each  other.  We  are  no  more  strangers:  we  are  friends.  We  clasp 
each  other's  hands  to-day  with  a  warmth  born  of  confidence  and 
gratitude;  we  look  into  each  other's  faces  with  affectionate  interest; 
we  listen  to  each  other's  words  with  eager  expectation.  We  will 
tell  each  other  of  our  individual  experiences  since  last  we  met, — our 
trials  and  defeats,  our  triumphs  and  gains,  our  undying  trusts  and 
hopes  for  "pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty."  When  we  return 
to  often  difficult  and  lonely  posts  of  duty  in  far  distant  countries, 
the  memory  of  these  days  of  spirit-communion  will  remain  with  us 
as  an  encouragement  and  an  inspiration.  Truly,  it  is  good  for  us 
to  be  here.  This  is  to  us  none  other  than  the  house  of  God,  and 
this  is  a  gate  to  heaven ! 

But,  in  the  midst  of  our  mutual  felicitation,  a  shadow  falls  across 
our  minds  as  we  recall  tenderly  and  sorrowfully  those  brave  and 
ardent  spirits  among  us  who,  since  last  we  came  together,  have 
ceased  their  faithful  labors  on  earth  and  been  called  to  more  glorious 
service  in  heaven.  The  past  year  has  deprived  us  of  the  companion- 
ship and  counsel  of  one  of  the  most  widely  honored  and  influential 
of  our  fellow-workers,  Professor  Albert  Rdville,  of  Paris.  Eminent 
as  a  scholar  and  theologian,  he  was  still  more  distinguished  as  the 
eloquent  champion  of  a  free  and  rational  Christianity  and  for  the 
loftiness  of  his  moral  and  spiritual  ideals.  At  our  last  Congress 
in  Geneva  his  voice  was  still  vibrant  for  religious  freedom  and  unity, 
and  its  echoes  can  never  die  out  of  our  hearts. 

One  of  the  first  to  acclaim  the  formation  of  our  International 
Council  was  Signor  Fernando  Bracciforti,  of  Milan,  who  pleaded  at 
our  London  meeting  with  all  the  impassioned  earnestness  of  his  race 
for  religious  liberty  and  progress,  and  later  translated  into  Italian 
several  of  the  papers  of  the  Congress.  A  brave  Garibaldian  soldier, 
he  stood  for  years  almost  alone  in  his  native  country  for  the  Uni- 
tarian form  of  Christianity.  He  fought  nobly  for  us,  and  we  rev- 
erently render  him  the  tribute  of  our  grateful  remembrance. 

At  the  Geneva  meetings  in  1905  the  proceedings  were  impressively 
opened  by  a  prayer  from  the  venerable  lips  of  Pasteur  L.  Audemars, 


56 

of  Lausanne,  a  patriarch  of  ninety-two  years,  a  devoted  adherent 
of  liberal  Christianity.  In  the  fulness  of  his  years  and  labors 
he  has  since  been  gathered  to  his  fathers,  and  confides  the  never- 
completed  task  of  religious  emancipation  to  our  loyal  hands  and 
hearts. 

Rev.  Richard  Lyttle,  a  Unitarian  clergyman  of  Monyrea,  Ireland, 
was  a  delegate  to  our  Congress  at  Geneva.  His  early  death  called 
out  a  remarkable  demonstration  of  regard  and  sorrow  on  the  part 
of  his  compatriots.  The  whole  community  gave  itself  up  to  mourn- 
ing. Protestants  and  Catholics,  liberals  and  orthodox,  priests  and 
ministers,  walked  side  by  side  in  long  procession  at  his  funeral,  thus 
testifying  to  a  noble  life  spent  in  the  service  of  his  country  and  his 
kind,  and  affording  a  striking  illustration  of  that  religious  breadth 
and  concord  for  whose  promotion  our  International  Council  was 
organized. 

The  lamented  death  of  Ananda  Mohun  Bose,  the  eminent  Hindu 
lawyer  and  statesman,  a  leader  in  the  Brahmo-Somaj,  or  association 
of  Hindu  Theists,  affiliated  with  our  Council,  is  a  misfortune  to  us 
as  well  as  to  modern  India.  So,  too,  in  recalling  the  comparatively 
early  decease  of  the  brilliant  preacher  and  writer,  Rev.  Albert  Kalt- 
hoff,  of  Bremen,  we  unite  with  our  German  fellow-believers  in  de- 
ploring the  loss  of  one  who,  while  often  at  variance  with  us  in  re- 
ligious science  and  philosophy,  was  ever  faithful  to  the  fundamental 
verities  of  freedom,  truth,  and  God. 

The  interval  of  time  between  our  biennial  Congresses  is  usefully 
occupied  by  your  officers  and  Executive  Committee  in  labors  for 
the  cause  it  represents,  in  carrying  out  so  far  as  possible  the  deci- 
sions of  previous  meetings,  and  preparing  for  the  next  one.  Dur- 
ing the  past  two  years  a  large  correspondence  with  fellow-liberals 
the  world  over  has  been  conducted  by  the  General  Secretary,  by 
President  Edouard  Montet,  and  various  members  of  the  committee. 
By  this  agency  the  knowledge  of  our  aims  and  methods  has  been 
much  extended  and  our  acquaintance  with  the  conditions  and  needs 
of  religious  liberals  in  other  lands  enlarged,  while  we,  in  turn,  have 
been  enabled  to  reinspire  many  brave  and  devoted  laborers  for  re- 
ligious enlightenment  and  progress  who  suffer  from  the  isolation 
and  material  privation  which  often  attend  their  lot,  or  who  are  the 
victims  of  dogmatic  intolerance  and  ecclesiastical  oppression.     Nor 


57 

have  we  always  contented  ourselves  with  words  alone.  Despite 
the  fact  that  our  Council  has  as  yet  no  treasury,  no  funds,  and  no 
stated  income,  means  have  been  found,  in  some  cases,  to  make  a 
modest  contribution  for  the  relief  of  individuals  and  agencies  repre- 
senting our  principles  and  needing  our  help.  An  interesting  instance 
of  such  international  co-operation  is  to  be  found  in  the  organization 
a  year  or  more  since,  at  Geneva,  of  a  society  for  promoting  general 
Protestant,  and  more  especially  French  Protestant,  interests  in  the 
present  religious  crisis  in  that  country, — a  society  whose  aims  our 
Council  was  glad  to  further  in  both  material  and  moral  ways.  The 
happy  results  attending  this  practical  co-operation  with  our  fellow- 
workers  in  other  lands  makes  the  creation  of  a  central  caisse,  or 
treasury,  for  our  association  seem  more  than  ever  desirable.  As 
a  rule,  radical  thought  and  poverty  of  material  resources  seem  to  go 
together,  while  orthodoxy  and  wealth  are  almost  synonymous  terms. 
Dean  Swift  once  sarcastically  remarked  that  the  Lord  showed  what 
He  thought  of  great  wealth  by  the  people  he  gave  it  to.  Would  that 
we  could  be  sure  that  our  poverty  is  an  outward  and  visible  sign  of 
inward  and  spiritual  grace!  In  many  communities  there  is  no 
way  in  which  our  struggling  cause  could  be  more  surely  established 
than  by  a  timely  and  needed  grant  of  money  for  the  support  of  a 
minister,  the  maintenance  of  a  religious  journal,  or  the  dissemination 
of  liberal  literature. 

This  leads  us  to  acknowledge  with  gratitude  the  large  help  our 
cause  is  receiving  from  the  liberal  religious  journals  of  the  world. 
Papers  like  the  Christian  Register  and  Universalist  Leader  of  Bos- 
ton, the  Inquirer  and  Christian  Life  of  London,  Das  Protestanten- 
blatt  and  Die  Christliche  Welt  of  Germany,  Le  Protestant  and  La 
Vie  Nouvette  of  France,  De  Hervorming  of  Holland,  give  large 
space  to  the  announcements  of  our  International  Council,  and  ex- 
press great  sympathy  with  its  spirit  and  purposes.  The  journals 
named  have  recently  issued  as  supplements  two  large  bulletins  giv- 
ing information  concerning  the  approaching  session  of  the  Boston 
Congress,  thus  assuring  the  latter  a  wide-spread  and  effective  ad- 
vertisement. Besides  these  journals,  however,  there  are  twenty 
others  in  the  various  countries  of  Europe,  America,  and  Asia,  which 
are  in  accord  with  our  aims  and  cordially  second  our  endeavors. 
It  should  be  our  constant  effort  to  repay  this  countenance  and  sup- 


58 

i 

port  by  furnishing  original  contributions  and  intelligence  to  the 
columns  of  these  journals,  securing  subscribers  and  advertisements 
for  them,  and  in  every  way  in  our  power  aiding  them  to  increase 
in  their  own  country  and  vernacular  the  sway  of  enlightened  and 
liberal  religion. 

Of  our  last  Congress  at  Geneva  over  four  hundred  reports  ap- 
peared in  the  European  newspapers.  Many  of  them  were  friendly 
notices  of  the  stately  and  admirably  arranged  volume  of  Proceed- 
ings and  Papers  of  that  Congres's,  of  which  its  president,  Professor 
Edouard  Montet,  was  the  conscientious  editor,  and  which  has  had 
quite  an  extensive  circulation.  Under  the  careful  supervision  of 
one  of  our  committee,  Professor  G.  Boros,  of  Kolozsvar,  a  transla- 
tion of  sixteen  of  these  papers  into  Hungarian  has  recently  been 
published.  It  suffices  to  say  that  next  to  our  Congresses  themselves 
there  is  no  better  agency  for  attaining  the  objects  for  which  our 
Council  was  organized  than  the  propaganda  through  the  printed 
page.  We  rejoice,  therefore,  over  the  great  literary  activity  dis- 
played by  the  members  of  our  association,  the  numerous  and  im- 
portant books  and  articles  in  reviews  they  are  constantly  producing, 
and  their  effective  service  for  religious  truth  and  freedom  as  journal- 
ists, lecturers,  teachers,  and  preachers. 

In  this  connection  we  may  allude  to  three  recent  literary  events 
of  characteristic  importance  to  our  cause:  first  the  institution 
of  a  new  theological  and  philosophical  review,  the  Harvard 
Journal  of  Theology,  to  be  edited  by  the  theological  faculty  of 
Harvard  University;  second,  the  appearance  of  a  new  definitive 
American  edition,  in  sixteen  volumes,  of  the  writings  of  Theodore 
Parker;  and,  third,  the  issue  in  Germany  and  other  countries  of 
several  distinct  series  of  popular  handbooks  on  theological,  philo- 
sophical, and  religious  topics,  written  by  eminent  scholars,  and  which 
enjoy  already  a  very  large  circulation, — a  gratifying  proof  that 
the  conclusions  of  modern  historical  and  critical  science  are  no 
longer  to  be  the  exclusive  possession  of  the  learned  classes  and  the 
university,  but  are  to  be  brought  increasingly  to  the  knowledge 
and  comprehension  of  the  plain  people  of  God.  When  this  shall  be 
successfully  accomplished,  a  religious  revolution,  or  rather  trans- 
formation, of  Christendom  will  not  be  far  away.  Surely,  in  view 
of  all  this  public  service  we  do  not  claim  too  much  when  we  say 


59 

that  no  association  of  our  day  represents  more  scholarly,  gifted, 
earnest,  and  devout  minds  than  ours,  no  school  of  religious 
thought  receives  greater  encouragement  from  modern  science,  schol- 
arship, and  criticism,  is  so  identified  with  the  social  progress  of  our 
time,  or  has  greater  reason  to  recall  trustfully  the  Master's  saying, 
"Fear  not,  little  flock,  for  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give 
you  the  kingdom." 

During  the  past  two  years  interchanges  of  sentiment  and  service 
between  the  religious  associations  which  make  our  Council  the 
organ  of  their  larger  and  international  relations  with  each  other 
have  been  increasingly  frequent.  A  striking  instance  of  this  was 
the  presence  of  some  twenty  foreign  delegates,  representing  ten  differ- 
ent countries,  at  the  last  annual  meeting  of  the  British  and  Foreign 
Unitarian  Association.  At  recent  sessions  of  the  Protestantenbond, 
or  Union  of  Dutch  Liberals,  the  Swiss  Verein  fuer  freies  Christentum, 
the  Protestantenverein  and  the  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt  in 
Germany,  the  American  Unitarian  Association,  the  Brahmo-Somaj 
of  India,  greetings  were  brought  by  envoys  from  liberal  bodies  in 
other  and  foreign  countries.  At  a  number  of  these  gatherings  our 
International  Council  was  represented  in  person  or  by  letter.  We 
trust  the  day  may  come  when  this  Council  shall  be  enabled  to  main- 
tain an  agent  constantly  in  the  field,  who  shall  regularly  visit  the 
more  important  of  these  meetings  of  religious  liberals  in  all  coun- 
tries and  become  an  intermediary  between  them  in  the  interest  of 
their  common  aims. 

Concerning  the  important  events  in  the  religious  world  since  last 
we  met  in  council,  and  their  effect  on  the  twin  causes  of  religious 
liberty  and  enlightenment,  the  various  speakers  from  abroad  who 
are  to  address  this  series  of  meetings  will  give  well-instructed  and 
comprehensive  reports.  A  careful  listening  to  their  statements, 
supplemented  by  a  reading  of  the  volume  of  Proceedings  and 
Papers  of  the  Congress,  which  is  to  appear  forthwith,  will  yield 
the  latest  and  best  information  of  the  condition  and  prospects  of 
religious  liberty  and  progress  throughout  the  world. 

One  of  the  votes  of  the  Congress  at  Geneva  was  that  its  Execu- 
tive Committee  should  collect,  edit,  and  present  to  the  next  Congress 
the  creeds,  declarations  of  belief,  working  principles,  statements 
of  purpose,  etc.,  in  present  use  by  the  various  associations  and  church 


6o 

fellowships  affiliated  with  this  International  Council.  It  was  felt 
that  such  an  exhibit  of  present-day  faith  and  purpose  among  re- 
ligious liberals  the  world  over  would  be  of  mutual  interest  and  help- 
ful to  our  common  cause.  In  accordance  with  this  decision  a  cir- 
cular asking  this  information  was  sent  to  a  large  number  of  asso- 
ciations and  churches  Many  replies  have  been  received,  but,  as  a 
number  of  the  parties  addressed  have  not  yet  reported  and  the  ma- 
terial in  hand  needs  careful  sifting  and  editing,  your  committee 
advises  that  the  matter  be  recommitted  to  them  for  further  con- 
sideration and  as  early  publication  as  possible.  The  one  general 
and  gratifying  conclusion  which  we  have  derived  from  the  reading 
of  the  statements  of  faith  thus  far  submitted  is  that  it  is  not  essential 
to  unity  of  action  among  religious  liberals  that  there  should  be  uni- 
formity of  belief  among  them;  that  the  ideal  we  should  keep  in  mind 
is  not  similarity  of  opinions,  however  advanced,  but  the  Unity  of 
the  Spirit  amidst  large  diversities  of  gifts  and  operations. 

Each  of  the  Congresses  we  have  thus  far  held  has  had  its  own 
characteristics  and  made  its  peculiar  contribution  to  our  cause.  At 
London  we  discovered  each  other  and  ourselves.  We  laid  the 
foundation  for  a  lasting  fellowship  of  the  spirit  and  learned  to  know 
the  opportuneness  and  promise  of  our  international  movement.  At 
Amsterdam  we  came  into  touch  with  the  Teutonic  element,  repre- 
sented there  especially  by  the  sturdy  Dutch  nation,  the  historic 
champions  of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  Here,  too,  we  solved  the 
linguistic  problem  of  our  Congress,  four  different  tongues — Dutch, 
German,  French,  and  English — being  used  by  the  delegates,  but 
mediated  to  our  understanding  by  one  Pentecostal  spirit  of  truth 
and  fraternity. 

At  our  Third  Congress  in  Geneva  we  beheld  the  surprising  irony 
of  history  by  which  this  ancient  stronghold  of  Calvinism  has  been 
transformed  into  a  seat  of  freedom  and  enlightenment,  an  acknowl- 
edged centre  of  liberal  religion.  Here  we  came  into  closer  relations 
with  the  Latin  races,  especially  with  those  using  the  French  idiom, 
while  liberal  Roman  Catholics  as  well  as  Protestants  participated 
in  our  conferences. 

The  Boston  Congress  is  the  heritor  of  the  insight  and  experience, 
the  brotherly  spirit  and  moral  momentum;  acquired  through  our 
previous  gatherings.     The  names  of  tried  and  honored  friends  and 


6i 

fellow-workers  appear  on  its  programmes  side  by  side  with  allies 
new  gained  for  our  cause. 

It  is  a  matter  of  disappointment  to  our  Council  that  some  of  its 
most  devoted  members  have  not  been  able  this  year,  for  various 
reasons,  to  undertake  the  long  journey  across  the  ocean  and  par- 
ticipate in  the  proceedings  of  the  Congress  in  Boston.  The  list  of 
these  is  too  long  to  enumerate,  but  we  may  at  least  express  our  re- 
gret that  Dr.  Herbert  C.  Smith,  of  London,  to  whose  initiative 
is  largely  due  the  splendid  action  taken  by  which  the  transatlantic 
journey  of  so  large  a  number  of  our  British  delegates  to  the  Congress 
was  assured,  is  unable,  because  of  slender  health,  to  be  one  of  the 
cheerful  company  of  pilgrims  over  sea  which  his  zeal  has  made 
possible. 

We  sadly  miss  at  this  meeting  also  Dr.  John  Estlin  Carpenter,  of 
Oxford,  and  Dr.  Henricus  Oort,  of  Leiden,  the  Presidents  of  our 
First  and  Second  Congresses,  respectively;  Mrs.  Humphry  Ward  de- 
tained at  home,  "to  her  great  regret,"  by  literary  engagements; 
Revs.  Stopford  Brooke,  James  Drummond,  P.  H.  Wicksteed,  and 
James  Harwood,  of  London;  Professor  Chantre,  of  Geneva;  Revs. 
James  Hocart,  of  Brussels,  Loenen-Martinet,  of  Holland,  Altherr, 
of  Basel;  J.  Smile  Roberty,  of  the  Oratoire,  Paris,  and  Rev.  Charles 
Wagner,  the  well-known  author  of  "The  Simple  Life"  and  other 
books;  Father  Hyacinthe  Loyson  and  Professor  Paul  Sabatier,  of 
France, — all  of  whom  have  been  deeply  interested  members  of  our 
previous  Congresses.  Until  the  last  moment  we  had  hoped  for  the 
presence  of  Professors  B.  D.  Eerdmans,  of  Leiden,  and  George  Boros, 
of  Kolozsvar,  active  members  of  our  Council,  but  prevented  by 
home  duties  from  attendance.  Professors  Rudolf  Eucken  and  Hein- 
rich  Weinel,  of  the  University  of  Jena,  had  promised  to  read  papers 
at  our  Boston  Congress,  but  are  unable  to  come  because  of  unex- 
pected professional  engagements.  The  former,  however,  sends  an 
important  paper  which  will  be  read.  Many  letters  of  regret  have 
been  received,  by  prominent  scholars,  thinkers,  and  divines  of  all 
branches  of  the  Church  the  world  over,  which  will  be  printed  in  the 
volume  of  the  Proceedings  and  Papers  of  the  Congress.  To  these 
and  all  friends  and  allies  of  our  international  movement  we  send 
greeting  and  good-will  and  our  appreciation  of  their  earnest  and 
effective  services  to  the  cause  of  religious  freedom  and  progress. 


62 

In  accordance  with  a  general  desire  we  have  given  at  this  Congress 
a  larger  place  on  our  programmes  to  the  practical  aspects  of  liberal 
religion,  as  these  are  expressed  in  the  ethical  aims,  the  social  reforms, 
and  philanthropic  endeavors  of  our  day.  The  very  name  of  our 
association  is  a  constant  reminder  to  us  that  we  are  religious 
"workers"  as  well  as  "thinkers,"  and  should  give  large  and  in- 
creasing attention  at  our  meetings  to  those  practical  applications  of 
religious  truth  and  duty  which  are  the  best  fruits  of  our  religion 
and  the  glory  of  our  time.  The  subjects  of  some  of  the  addresses 
to  which  we  are  to  listen, — addresses  on  personal  and  social  ethics, 
industrial  justice,  temperance,  and  international  peace, — as  well  as 
the  acknowledged  competence  of  those  who  are  to  speak  on  these 
themes,  will,  we  trust,  indicate  our  interest  in  these  urgent  questions 
of  our  day. 

Our  Boston  Congress  is  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  Interna- 
tional Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers 
and  Workers,  but  calls  itself  simply  a  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals. 
The  explanation  of  this  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  one  of  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  our  International  Association  not  to  interfere 
with  the  local  conditions  and  preferences  of  the  religious  commu- 
nities which  invite  us  to  be  their  guests.  They  are  better  judges 
than  we  of  their  own  situation  and  needs,  and  how  best  to  secure 
the  co-operation  of  the  liberal  elements  among  them  for  the  recep- 
tion and  work  of  our  Council.  Thus  at  Amsterdam  our  general 
gathering  called  itself  a  "Congres  van  Vrijzinnig-godsdienstigen," — 
a  "Congress  of  Religious  Free-thinkers."  At  Geneva  we  met  as  a 
"Congres  du  Christianisme  Liberal  et  Progressif," — a  "Congress  of 
Religious  and  Progressive  Christians."  Following  this  example, 
the  committee  who  have  had  in  charge  the  organization  of  the  Boston 
session  thought  it  advisable  to  call  it  a  Congress  of  Religious  Lib- 
erals. The  best  evidence  that  they  acted  wisely  in  this  matter  is 
the  wider  and  more  inclusive  fellowship  it  has  made  possible.  On 
our  list  of  officers  and  reception  committees,  as  well  as  on  the  pro- 
gramme of  our  meetings,  are  to  be  found  the  representatives  of 
many  different  branches  of  Christendom  and  the  Church  Universal. 
Once  again  the  religious  world  is  afforded  the  edifying  spectacle 
of  a  great  body  of  men  and  women,  belonging  to  some  thirty 
different  households  of  faith  and  distinguished   by  large  varieties 


63 

of  opinion,  coming  together  in  peace  and  good  will  to  exchange 
ideas,  and  to  consort  and  worship  together  in  the  spirit  of  freedom, 
reverence,  and  charity. 

Even  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  of  all  existing  fellowships 
surely  the  least  likely  to  sympathize  with  the  aims  and  methods  of 
a  body  like  ours  is  to-day  represented  at  our  Congress  by  one  of  its 
most  scholarly  and  courageous  priests,  while  well-informed  Protes- 
tant divines,  laying  aside  all  prejudice,  are  to  treat  of  the  higher 
interests  of  this  ancient  and  mother  Church  of  Christendom  in  a 
profoundly  sympathetic  spirit.  The  inter-religious  and  inter- 
racial character  of  our  gathering  is  still  further  evidenced  by  the 
presence  and  participation  in  it  of  eminent  representatives  of  other 
great  world-religions  and  branches  of  the  human  family,  the  Brah- 
min, the  Jew,  and  the  Mahometan, — the  sons  of  Asia  and  Africa  as 
well  as  of  Europe  and  America — while  at  our  opening  session  last 
Sunday  evening  at  Symphony  Hall,  with  mighty  unison  of  heart 
and  voice,  the  great  congregation  sent  forth  to  the  religious  world 
the  greeting  and  message  of  our  Congress,  that  angelic  song  which 
to-day,  as  ever,  brings  glad  tidings  of  deliverance  to  mankind, — 
"Glory  to  God  in  the  highest;  on  earth  peace,  good  will  toward 
men!" 

For,  while  we  call  ourselves  liberals,  we  are  religious  liberals. 
It  is  in  the  truest  sense  a  religious  movement  which  we  have  inaug- 
urated,— a  movement  which  finds  its  chief  inspiration  in  the  positive 
affirmations  of  faith,  and  not  in  criticism  and  negation.  Doubts 
and  denials  we  are  not  unfrequently  compelled  to  give  free  and  fear- 
less utterance  to,  but  they  are  only  incidental  to  our  main  purpose, 
which  is  to  cherish  and  develop  the  religious  life.  We  believe  that 
the  religious  sentiment  is  natural  to  man  and  of  surpassing  im- 
portance; that,  whatever  may  befall  its  accidental  and  transitory 
embodiments  in  dogma,  sacrament,  and  ritual,  religion  itself  will 
endure  forever,  the  very  life-blood  of  the  soul  of  man,  the  inner 
power  which  lifts  him  above  the  solicitations  of  the  senses  and  the 
distractions  of  the  world  into  communion  with  God  and  self-sacri- 
ficing devotion  to  mankind. 

Furthermore,  we  are  liberals  in  religion,  not  because  we  maintain 
this  or  that  set  of  opinions,  however  advanced ;  not  because  we  deny 
or  antagonize  other  people's  opinions,  not  because  we  hold  our 


64 

opinions  loosely  or  have  no  opinions  whatever.  Liberalism  is  to  us 
a  temper,  an  attitude  of  the  mind,  a  disposition  of  the  heart  towards 
truth.  Liberalism  is  the  supremacy  of  the  spirit  over  the  letter  in 
religion.  It  is  the  mind  in  a  state  of  growth,  and  is  thus  differ- 
entiated from  orthodoxy,  which  is  the  type  of  a  mind  that  has  stopped 
growing,  which  accepts  finalities  in  religion  and  claims  that  its  opin- 
ions are  infallible.  We  are  liberals  because  we  believe  in  freedom, 
in  growth  in  evolution  in  religion,  as  in  all  else;  because  we  believe 
in  sincerity  and  courage  and  hope  in  our  treatment  of  religious 
questions. 

But,  above  all,  we  are  liberals  because  we  cherish  a  tolerant  and 
sympathetic  spirit  towards  those  with  whom  we  differ  in  opinion. 
No  mind  can  be  truly  liberal  which  entertains  a  hateful,  scornful 
temper  towards  another  type  of  mind.  The  true  liberal  not  only 
speaks  the  truth  but  he  speaks  it  in  love.  He  not  only  tolerates, 
he  loves  his  fellow-men.  He  is  charitable  towards  their  intellectual 
errors  and  sympathetic  with  their  endeavors  after  truth.  He  rev- 
erences their  reverences.  He  is  not  impatient  with  error  if  it  be 
error  held  in  the  spirit  of  truth.  The  only  unpardonable  sin  in  his 
eyes  is  uncharity, — a  loveless  heart,  an  intolerant  mind. 

This  it  is  to  be  a  religious  liberal,  and  of  such  a  spirit  and  purpose 
is  the  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  which  invites 
you  to-day  to  its  deliberations  and  concerted  endeavors  for  re- 
ligious freedom,  truth,  and  charity.  It  is  persuaded,  like  the  apos- 
tle, that  "where  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  liberty."  There- 
fore, it  would  "serve  the  Lord  in  newness  of  spirit,  and  not  in  old- 
ness  of  the  letter,"  striving 

"To  build  the  Universal  Church 
Lofty  as  is  the  love  of  God, 
And  ample  as  the  wants  of  man." 


The  President. — I  want,  my  friends,  in  behalf  of  your  Local  Ex- 
ecutive Committee,  to  express  the  regret,  not  to  say  the  humiliation  of 
the  committee,  at  their  inadequate  power  of  prophecy.  Your  com- 
mittee has  not  been  able  rightly  or  justly  to  estimate  the  popular  in- 
terest in  this  gathering.  The  National  Conference  of  the  Unitarian 
Churches  has  not  within  recent  years  summoned  more  than  a  thou- 


65 

sand  members.  The  International  Council  has  never  had  more,  I 
think,  than  a  thousand  members.  In  arranging  for  your  meeting, 
your  Local  Committee  doubled  all  previous  records.  You  have 
doubled  that  record.  I  trust  that  most  of  our  visitors  from  abroad 
have  been  suitably  cared  for,  but  I  am  sorry  to  have  to  believe  that 
many  people  from  our  own  land  who  have  come  great  distances  have 
suffered  some  inconvenience. 

You  cannot  put  more  than  a  quart  of  water  into  a  quart  pot.  We 
have  hired  the  largest  rooms  that  the  city  affords.  That  all  of  you 
could  not  get  into  the  meeting  on  Sunday  night  is  a  matter  of  regret 
to  those  of  you  who  were  left  outside,  but  it  is  a  partial  alleviation  to 
know  that  there  is  so  much  popular  interest  in  our  gathering. 

We  are  to  have  the  pleasure  of  hearing  this  morning  of  the  progress 
and  outlook  of  this  work  in  England,  France,  and  Germany.  I 
hardly  need  to  say  here  that  the  steadfastness,  the  sanity,  the  public 
spirit,  and  the  wholesome  life  and  tendencies  of  the  Unitarian  churches 
of  Great  Britain  are  embodied  in  the  mind  and  the  person  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association.  This 
Council  is  infinitely  indebted  to  Mr.  Bowie,  for  he  organized  its  first 
public  meeting,  and  his  hand  has  been  on  the  helm  more  or  less  ever 
since.     I  have  great  pleasure  in  presenting  Mr.  Bowie. 


66 


THE    UNITARIAN    MOVEMENT    IN    ENGLAND. 

BY   REV.  W.  COPELAND   BOWIE,  OF  LONDON. 

The  Rev.  Alex.  Gordon,  our  most  learned  historian,  observes  that 
"the  history  of  the  Unitarian  movement  is  the  key  to  its  meaning." 
He  has  outlined  the  history,  making  the  year  1198  his  first  chrono- 
logical landmark,  and  indicating  three  distinct  historical  stages: 

(1)  sporadic  anti-trinitarianism,  native  and  exotic,  dating  from  1548; 

(2)  a  theological  school  of  thought,  making  use  of  the  Unitarian 
name,  bent  on  promulgating  the  doctrine  of  the  unipersonality  of 
the  Godhead,  dating  from  1682;  (3)  the  stage  of  Unitarian  church 
life,  in  which  worship  is  decisively  limited  to  God,  the  Father,  dating 
from  the  opening  of  Essex  Street  Chapel,  London,  by  Theophilus 
Lindsey,  in  1774. 

Professor  Bonet-Maury  finds  the  sources  of  English  Unitarianism 
in  the  theological  teachings  of  certain  Spanish  and  Italian  Protestants 
who,  about  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century,  found  their  way  to 
the  "Strangers'  Church"  in  London.  A  fusion  was  afterwards 
effected  between  Socinianism  and  the  more  liberal  and  rational 
elements  of  Anglo-Saxon  Christianity.  The  writings  of  John 
Bidle,  the  publication  of  the  Unitarian  tracts,  aided  by  the  broad 
and  enlightened  views  of  Milton,  Locke,  and  Newton,  gave  a  great 
impetus  to  the  movement  in  the  seventeenth  century.  The  writings 
of  Lardner,  Lindsey,  and  Priestley  in  the  eighteenth  century  prepared 
the  way  for  a  fuller  and  deeper  expression  of  Unitarianism  as  a 
theology,  as  seen  in  the  discourses  of  Channing  and  the  works 
of  Martineau  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Mr.  Gordon  has  shown, 
however,  that  anti-trinitarianism  existed  in  England  prior  to  the 
organization  of  the  Foreign  Congregations  in  London  in  1550. 

There  are  also  Unitarians  who  leap  the  centuries,  and  claim 
Moses  and  the  prophets  as  the  real  founders  of  their  faith; 
while  "Jesus  a  Unitarian"  and  "Paul  a  Unitarian"  have   been 


67 

the  titles  of  not  a  few  ably  written  tracts  and  eloquent  sermons. 
If  the  stricter  discipline  of  modern  schools  of  history  has 
chastened  and  subdued  these  imaginative  flights,  we  may  still  say 
that,  while  there  might  be  some  sense  of  fitness  in  calling  Moses  and 
the  prophets  Unitarians,  it  would  be  grotesque  to  label  them  as  Trini- 
tarians; and  an  orthodox  apologist  would  hardly  venture  to  claim 
that  Jesus  or  Paul  would  have  subscribed  to  the  Athanasian  Creed. 

In  his  introduction  to  Professor  Bonet-Maury's  valuable  book, 
Dr.  Martineau  leans  to  the  view  that  the  Unitarian  movement 
cannot  be  traced  to  any  single  teacher  or  specific  date.  It  had  its 
sources  in  the  thoughts  of  many  minds  in  many  lands. 

The  word  "Unitarian,"  as  employed  by  Unitarians  themselves, 
does  not  always  mean  the  same  thing.  In  England  it  is  some- 
times used  (generally  by  those  who  dislike  it  and  would  rejoice 
to  be  rid  of  it)  to  indicate  a  somewhat  narrow,  dogmatic  the- 
ology of  an  unorthodox  type,  which  probably  no  living  Unitarian 
would  recognize  as  descriptive  of  his  religious  position.  Some- 
times it  is  used  (especially  by  those  who  are  attached  to  the  name 
and  who  wish  to  retain  it)  to  indicate  a  certain  attitude  of  mind  and 
temper  in  approaching  religious  problems,  with  the  emphasis  placed 
upon  the  idea  of  "unity," — the  unity  of  nature,  the  unity  of  man- 
kind, the  unity  of  religion,  and  the  unity  of  all  in  God.  I  am  not 
concerned  to-day  in  discussing  which  of  these  interpretations  is  the 
more  correct  or  whether  both  are  wrong.  Etymology  is  an  inter- 
esting and  instructive  branch  of  study,  but  it  has  its  obvious  limita- 
tions. It  can  tell  you  what  a  word  once  upon  a  time  meant,  and 
what,  according  to  its  derivation,  it  ought  to  mean;  but,  if  you  wish 
to  discover  its  real  meaning,  it  is  necessary  to  learn  what  it  stands 
for  in  the  minds  of  the  men  who  use  it  as  descriptive  of  their  thought 
and  feeling  at  the  present  time.  In  England,  as  in  America,  the 
tendency  is  to  make  the  name  "Unitarian"  cover  the  largest  and 
best  religious  faith  which  man  has  attained,  with  a  public  notice 
to  the  effect  that  any  larger  or  better  faith  which  the  future  may 
have  in  store  for  man  will  receive  cordial  welcome. 

In  what  may  be  called  its  unorganized  form  the  Unitarian  move- 
ment in  England  is  very  much  alive.  It  would  of  course  be  easy 
to  quote  examples  of  bigotry,  superstition,  ignorance,  and  intoler- 
ance. The  rule  of  the  priest  and  the  social  pressure  of  the  Established 


68 

Church  are  active,  potent  forces  throughout  the  land,  and  they  make 
the  task  of  the  religious  reformer,  and  especially  of  the  outspoken 
heretic,  arduous  and  heart-breaking  at  times.  Yet,  in  spite  of  all 
difficulties  and  drawbacks,  freedom  of  inquiry,  frankness  of  expres- 
sion, largeness  of  outlook,  eagerness  to  attain  a  truer  theology  and 
a  better  religion,  are  receiving  in  England  to-day  fuller  and  wider 
recognition  among  all  classes  of  the  community  than  ever  before. 
The  evidences  of  this  are  more  apparent  in  centres  of  active  thought 
and  fife  than  in  ancient  cathedral  cities  or  remote  villages,  though 
"voices"  even  from  these  latter  are  becoming  more  and  more  fre- 
quent. The  publication  of  Dr.  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
with  its  mildly  rationalistic  evangelical  Christianity,  and  of  the  En- 
cyclopaedia Biblica,  with  its  relentless  overthrow  of  the  Scriptural 
citadels  reared  with  such  labor  by  orthodox  divines, — these  two 
great  and  notable  works  show  to  what  lengths  scholarship  has 
travelled  on  the  way  to  perfect  freedom. 

At  various  periods  in  the  history  of  the  Established  Church  in 
England  the  charge  has  been  freely  made  that  the  theology  of  not 
a  few  of  its  clergy  and  many  of  its  laity  was  honeycombed  by  Uni- 
tarianism.  The  late  Mr.  C.  H.  Spurgeon  charged  his  fellow  Baptist 
ministers  in  the  "  Down-grade  "  controversy  with  being  tainted  with 
Unitarianism.  Quite  recently,  the  "New  Theology"  of  Mr.  R.  J. 
Campbell  has  been  labelled  (too  precipitately,  I  think)  by  its  friends 
and  foes  alike  as  "Unitarian."  It  may,  however,  be  said  with  perfect 
fairness  that  the  Unitarian  movement,  in  larger  or  smaller  measure, 
may  be  discovered  within  the  borders  of  almost  every  church  and 
sect  in  England,  not  excluding  the  Salvation  Army.  The  more 
extreme  clerical  party,  in  fighting  for  the  retention  of  denominational 
religious  teaching  in  public  schools,  frequently  declare  that  "unsec- 
tarianism"  is  only  another  name  for  Unitarianism.  In  this  they 
are  not  so  well  informed,  for  much  of  the  so-called  "  unsectarian " 
teaching  in  public  schools  in  England  consists  of  a  very  narrow 
and  antiquated  orthodoxy.  They  are,  however,  right  in  proclaiming 
that  an  "unsectarian"  system  cannot  exclude  Unitarianism. 

Probably  the  majority  of  the  people  of  England  to-day  stand 
outside  all  the  churches.  The  bulk  of  them  are  not  anti-religious. 
Only  a  small  number  are  avowed  secularists.  They  are  mostly  in- 
different to  the  sayings  and  doings  of  churches.    These  men  are  not 


69 

without  their  dim  visions  of  the  eternal.  They  have  their  unspoken 
thoughts  and  feelings  concerning  God  and  life  here  and  hereafter. 
When  you  get  into  conversation  with  the  more  intelligent  of  them 
and  give  an  outline  of  what  Unitarians  believe  and  teach,  many  are 
ready  to  exclaim:  "Why,  that  is  what  I  think,  that  is  how  I  feel. 
I,  too,  have  been  a  Unitarian  without  knowing  it." 

Legally,  Unitarians  in  England  are  non-conformists.  They  are 
outside  the  State  Church.  Theologically,  they  are  often  described 
as  dissenters  of  the  dissenters.  But  the  Unitarian  movement  in 
England  is  not,  and  never  has  been,  in  organic  communion  with 
non -conformity.  In  its  earlier  days  the  movement  found  its  home, 
to  a  larger  extent,  inside  than  outside  the  Established  Church. 
John  Bidle  (1616-1662),  whom  Joshua  Toulmin  calls  the  "father 
of  the  English  Unitarians,"  had  no  quarrel  on  principle  either  with 
episcopacy  or  a  State  Church.  Thomas  Firmin  (1632-1697),  Bidle's 
friend  and  benefactor,  a  member  of  the  little  society  of  Unitarian 
worshippers  formed  in  165 1,  was  well  known  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  reckoned  among  his  personal  friends  several  bishops 
and  many  of  the  leading  clergy  of  his  day.  Queen  Mary,  who  ap- 
proved of  Firmin 's  benevolence,  but  was  shocked  by  his  heresies, 
besought  Tillotson  to  put  him  right  in  his  theology,  but  the  arch- 
bishop excused  himself  by  saying  that  Socinianism  had  become  so 
firmly  planted  in  the  London  merchant's  mind  that  he  was  not  now 
capable  of  a  contrary  impression.  If  Tillotson  was  disposed  to  be 
friendly,  there  were  others  who  took  a  different  view.  The  learned 
and  eloquent  Robert  South  called  these  early  Unitarians  "impious 
blasphemers,"  and  traced  their  pedigree  "back  in  a  direct  line  to 
the  devil  himself." 

From  time  to  time  various  attempts  were  made  to  obtain  a  foot- 
hold for  Unitarianism  within  the  Established  Church,  and  it  was 
with  extreme  reluctance  that  several  able  men  severed  their  connec- 
tion with  the  State  Church  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury. William  Frend  (1757-1841),  writing  from  Jesus  College, 
Cambridge,  September  10,  1788,  issued  "An  Address  to  the  Members 
of  the  Church  of  England  and  to  Protestant  Trinitarians  in  general, 
exhorting  them  to  turn  from  the  false  worship  of  Three  Persons  to 
the  worship  of  the  One  True  God."  He  published  a  second  address 
a  few  months  later,  and  an  edition  was  also  issued  to  the  inhabitants 


7° 

of  Cambridge  and  the  neighborhood.  Frend  contended  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  was  "  a  libel  on  the  Scriptures,  and  an  insult 
to  the  understanding  of  mankind." 

Because  some  of  the  older  chapels  bear  the  designation  "Presby- 
terian," there  has  been  a  tendency  among  Unitarians  to  credit 
Presbyterianism  in  England  with  a  breadth  and  tolerance  in  religion 
which  are  not  easy  to  discover.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Presbyterian 
system  has  never,  in  any  country,  been  particularly  favorable  to  free 
inquiry  in  religion.  Joshua  Toulmin,  writing  in  1789,  regarded  it 
as  "a  ground  of  devout  thankfulness"  that  Presbyterianism  had 
no  existence  amongst  the  English  Protestant  dissenters  of  his  day, 
and  that  those  of  them  who  were  improperly  called  by  that  name 
were  genuine  advocates  of  liberty.  u  To  walk  in  all  the  ways  which 
God  had  made  known,  or  shall  make  known  to  them,"  was  the  fine 
phrase  of  an  Independent,  not  of  a  Presbyterian.  To  the  Baptist 
denomination  belongs  the  honor  of  having  consistently  repudiated 
throughout  its  history  all  coercive  power  over  the  minds  and  con- 
sciences of  men  in  reference  to  their  religious  beliefs.  The  Uni- 
tarian movement  owes  a  deep  debt  of  gratitude  not  to  Presbyterian- 
ism, but  to  many  of  those  to  whom  the  name  Presbyterian  was  given. 
The  meeting-houses  which  they  erected,  after  the  passing  of  the 
Toleration  Act  of  1689,  were  not  "Unitarian,"  for  Unitarianism  and 
Roman  Catholicism  were  alike  excluded  from  "toleration."  Hap- 
pily, the  older  trust  deeds  of  dissenters  rarely  set  out  in  detail  schemes 
of  doctrine.  Without  realizing  what  it  would  lead  to,  they  were 
content  to  found  their  chapels  simply  for  the  worship  of  God.  The 
love  of  freedom  took  root  in  their  minds,  and  by  slow  degrees  they 
passed  from  stage  to  stage  of  Arminianism,  of  Arianism,  and  of 
Unitarianism.  The  late  Mr.  Gladstone,  during  the  debates  on  the 
Dissenters'  Chapel  Bill  of  1844,  grasped  the  position  and  the  prin- 
ciple at  issue  with  wonderful  clearness.  "Here,"  he  said,  "were 
certain  persons,  who  founded  these  chapels,  entertaining  one  creed; 
and  the  present  possessors  of  these  chapels  profess  another  creed. 
I  admit  that  that  sounds  startling.  But,  if  you  take  the  pains  to 
follow  the  course  of  events  from  year  to  year,  it  is  impossible  to  say 
that,  at  any  given  period,  the  transition  from  one  doctrine  to  another 
was  made.  It  was  a  gradual  and  an  imperceptible  transition.  .  .  . 
The  parties  who  effected  it  made  a  different  use  of  the  principle  of 


7i 

inquiry  by  private  judgment  than  those  who  had  preceded  them, 
but  they  acted  on  a  principle  fundamentally  the  same,  and,  though 
I  may  lament  the  result,  I  do  not  see  how  their  title  is  vitiated  because 
they  used  it  to  one  effect,  and  others  to  another." 

About  one  hundred  and  fifty  existing  Unitarian  chapels  in  England 
were  founded  by  people  who  did  not  hold  what  would  now  be 
called  Unitarian  opinions.  Several  of  them  were  the  direct  out- 
come of  the  labors  of  clergymen  "ejected"  from  the  Estab- 
lished Church  in  consequence  of  the  passing  of  the  Act 
of  Uniformity  in  1662.  Few  of  these  men  were  Presbyterians. 
They  were  not  opposed  to  episcopacy,  but  to  enforced  con- 
formity to  ceremonies  and  doctrines  concerning  the  value  of 
which  they  were  in  doubt.  "It  is  impossible  to  read  any  non- 
conformist clerical  diary  of  that  age,"  writes  Mr.  Gordon,  "without 
admiring  the  faith  of  men  who  had  to  plod  their  way  from  shilling 
to  shilling,  from  bag  of  corn  to  bag  of  peas,  the  wolf  always  at  one 
door,  the  constable  at  the  other,  the  brave  resolution  ever  choking 
down  despair  and  stimulating  new  trust  in  God."  "If  we  turn," 
he  adds,  "  from  perceptions  of  truth  which  are  variable  to  the  forma- 
tive principles  of  judgment  and  conduct  which  stand  fast  in  the 
fidelity  of  conscience  and  the  paramount  obligations  of  religious 
sincerity,  then  I  think  that  modern  liberals,  of  whatever  school,  may 
gratefully  own  the  spirit  of  the  Ejected  as  a  salt  of  our  English 
history  which  hath  not  lost  its  savor." 

The  secession  of  Theophilus  Lindsey  from  the  Established  Church 
and  the  opening  of  a  chapel  in  London  for  Unitarian  worship,  and 
the  powerful,  vivid  advocacy  of  Dr.  Priestley,  gave  a  fresh  impetus 
to  the  Unitarian  movement  in  England.  There  was  considerable 
missionary  zeal  for  a  time.  Tracts  were  published  in  1791  by  the 
Unitarian  Society  for  Promoting  Christian  knowledge  and  the  Practice 
of  Virtue.  The  Unitarian  Fund,  founded  in  1806,  assisted  mission- 
ary preachers;  half -deserted  chapels  were  filled  by  eager  congre- 
gations, and  new  movements  were  started.  The  Trinity  Act  of 
18 13  made  it  legal  publicly  to  profess  Unitarian  opinions  and  to 
worship  in  Unitarian  chapels. 

The  literature  in  which  the  Unitarianism  of  a  century  ago  expressed 
itself  is  seldom  read  nowadays.  Naturally,  it  is  out  of  touch  with 
modern  thought.      Colenso  on  the  date  and  authorship  of  the  Pen- 


72 

tateuch,  Darwin  on  the  "Origin  of  Species,"  and  many  another 
writer,  have  changed  the  mental  outlook,  especially  of  those  who 
were  unhampered  by  traditional  creeds  or  by  ecclesiastical  authority. 
The  tracts  published  by  the  American  Unitarian  Association  in  1827 
are  not  unlike  those  issued  in  England  some  years  earlier.  The 
first  tract  bears  the  title,  "The  Faith  Once  Delivered  to  the  Saints." 
After  setting  forth  in  an  interesting  and  instructive  way  what  the 
writer  conceived  to  be  the  true  Christian  faith,  he  adds:  "It  is 
obviously  a  plain,  simple,  intelligible  statement,  with  nothing  in  it 
to  perplex  the  understanding,  to  contradict  the  judgment  of  sound 
reason,  or  to  oppose  the  kind  affections  which  God  has  planted  within 
us."    Those  in  our  day  who  have  felt 

.  .  .  "the  heavy  and  the  weary  weight 
Of  all  this  unintelligible  world" 

press  upon  their  souls  are  hardly  likely  to  have  "the  burden  of  the 
mystery"  lightened  by  anything  quite  so  simple  as  "the  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints." 

In  the  second  tract,  "  One  Hundred  Scriptural  Arguments  for  the 
Unitarian  Faith,"  Jesus  is  "exalted  far  above  all  other  created 
intelligences,  he  is  a  being  distinct  from,  inferior  to,  and  dependent 
upon  the  Father  Almighty."  "The  supremacy  of  the  Father  and 
the  inferiority  of  the  Son  is  the  simple,  unembarrassed,  and  current 
doctrine  of  the  Bible."  The  "supremacy"  of  the  Father  and  the 
"inferiority"  of  the  Son, — this  kind  of  terminology  has  passed  out 
of  use.  It  has  no  meaning  or  application  to  current  Unitarian  con- 
ceptions of  God  or  Jesus,  or  of  their  relation  to  each  other. 

Tract  number  XI.  bears  the  title  "  Unitarianism  Vindicated  against 
the  Charge  of  not  going  far  enough."  The  writer  says,  "The  true 
and  only  reason  why,  as  Christians,  we  do  not  go  any  further,  is 
our  solemn,  firm,  and  deliberate  conviction  that  the  Scriptures 
do  not  go  any  further."  The  Bible  is  "an  authority  from  which 
there  is  no  appeal."  How  very  remote  from  present-day  Unitarian- 
ism such  sentiments  as  these  appear!  Try  to  imagine  the  dean  of 
the  Divinity  School  at  Harvard  or  the  principal  of  Manchester  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  giving  utterance  to  such  a  dictum!  How  admirably 
these  references  support  the  thesis  that  Unitarianism  is  a  "move- 
ment," not  a  denomination,  a  sect,  or  a  creed! 


73 

The  Unitarian  theology  of  a  century  ago,  or  indeed  of  a  half  or 
a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  is  no  longer  descriptive  of  the  beliefs  of 
Unitarians  to-day.  And  yet  all  the  way  along  there  has  been  an 
allegiance  to  principles  which  explain  and  justify  the  divergences. 
The  older,  like  the  modern,  writers  invariably  put  in  a  plea  for  mental 
freedom,  and  insist  on  the  supreme  importance  of  the  good  life. 
The  Unitarian  is  called  upon  "to  evince  the  excellence  of  his  faith 
by  its  influence  over  his  own  life  and  conversation."  Theodore 
Parker,  sixty-five  years  ago  (1842),  said:  "We  look  around  us,  and 
all  seems  to  change.  The  theology  of  our  fathers  is  unreadable. 
The  soul  of  man  remains  the  same.  God  still  speaks  in  reason, 
conscience,  faith, — is  still  immanent  in  his  children."  James  Mar- 
tineau,  writing  a  year  later,  gave  utterance  to  a  similar  thought: 
"  Our  very  progress,  which  is  our  peculiar  glory,  consists  in  at  once 
losing  and  leaping  the  past,  in  gaining  fresh  stations  from  which  to 
take  a  wise  retrospect,  and  become  more  deeply  aware  of  the  treas- 
ures we  have  used." 

Concerning  the  position,  work,  and  outlook  of  the  churches  in 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  in  which  Unitarian  worship  is  regularly 
held,  I  must  confine  myself  to  a  few  words.  There  are  two  hundred 
and  ninety-one  places  of  worship  in  England,  thirty-five  in  Wales, 
six  in  Scotland,  and  thirty-nine  in  Ireland, — three  hundred  and 
seventy-one  in  all.  The  total  membership  of  these  churches  at  the 
present  time  probably  does  not  exceed  forty  thousand.  On  an  aver- 
age, probably  not  more  than  twenty-five  thousand  persons  assemble 
for  worship  at  all  the  churches  combined  at  any  one  Sunday  service. 
There  are  said  to  be  large  numbers  of  Unitarians  in  attendance  at 
so-called  orthodox  churches.  There  are  probably  still  larger  num- 
bers who,  if  they  are  anything,  are  Unitarian  rather  than  Trinitarian, 
but  who  do  not  attend,  except  on  rare  occasions,  any  place  of  wor- 
ship. There  are  certainly  not  a  few  avowed  Unitarians  who  are 
seldom  seen  at  the  Sunday  services.  We  have  to  confess  that  our 
religious  services  often  fail  to  interest  people  who  are  intellectually 
in  accord  with  us;  and  our  imitations  of  the  ritual  of  other  churches 
do  not  seem  to  prove  very  helpful,  except  to  a  few.  Many  of  the 
older  Unitarian  families  leave  no  descendants.  Their  sons  and 
daughters  often  become  indifferent,  and  allow  social  and  other  very 
mundane  considerations  to  prevail.     There  are,  of  course,  splendid 


74 

exceptions.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  some  of  the  noblest  and 
sweetest  types  of  religious  men  and  woman  any  one  could  find  in 
the  British  Isles  have  been  nurtured  in  the  Unitarian  faith.  But 
we  have  to  admit  that,  were  it  not  for  the  incoming  of  people  from 
other  churches  and  from  "outside,"  many  of  our  older  congrega- 
tions would  long  since  have  become  extinct;  and  it  is  doubtful,  were 
it  not  for  the  missionary  zeal  of  converts,  aided  by  a  comparatively 
small  number  of  ardent  Unitarians,  whether  any  new  congregations 
would  have  been  founded.  If  the  missionary  spirit  were  to  die  out, 
if  the  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association  and  the  more  active 
district  societies  were  to  cease  their  operations,  the  Unitarian  move- 
ment, in  its  organized  form  in  England,  would  probably  decline 
rapidly  and  finally  disappear,  to  the  grievous  detriment  of  freedom 
and  progress  in  religion.* 

Our  catholic  ideals  are  often  in  danger  of  becoming  mere 
toys  of  the  intellect  or  of  the  imagination,  with  no  bearing  upon 
character  and  conduct.  To  the  listener,  if  not  to  the  preacher,  they 
become  stale  by  vain  repetition,  and  rapidly  lose  the  compelling 
charm  of  their  first  revelation.  Like  the  theological  dogmas  against 
which  they  are  intended  to  be  a  protest,  they  are  "less  of  a  gospel 
than  an  opinion,  less  a  faith  than  a  creed."  Dr.  Jowett  very  truly 
remarked  that  "a  church  which  is  liberal  may  also  be  indifferent, 
and,  having  attained  the  form  of  truth,  may  have  lost  the  power  of 
it."  The  faith  in  God  and  immortality  which  we  have  been  strug- 
gling to  rid  of  superstition,  as  the  late  Professor  Henry  Sidgwick 
reminds  us,  suddenly  seems  to  be  in  the  air;  and  in  seeking  for  a 
firm  basis  for  this  faith  we  find  ourselves  in  the  midst  of  the  fight 
with  death  that  "In  Memoriam"  so  powerfully  presents. 

The  pew  and  the  pulpit  in  Unitarian  churches  not  infrequently 
serve  as  "temporary  resting-places  for  theological  waits  and  anti- 
theological  strays."  But,  if  there  are  some  experiences  which  dis- 
appoint and  depress  us,  there  are  many  more  which  inspire  us  with 
confidence  and  hope.  The  joy  and  peace  which  come  to  converts 
to  Unitarianism,  the  eagerness  with  which  large  numbers  of  the 
common  people  listen  to  its  message  when  spoken  by  men  to  whom 

*  I  do  not  myself  believe  that  the  missionary  spirit  will  die  out.  Our  recent  experiments 
with  the  Unitarian  vans  will  probably  revive  a  consciousness  of  need  and  opportunity  which 
the  work  in  many  of  our  chapels  is  apt  to  hide  from  us. 


75 

it  is  a  gospel  of  life,  show  clearly  that  there  are  harvest  fields  in 
abundance  waiting  for  the  Unitarian  who  can  reap.  The  cure  for 
ineffectiveness,  for  useless  beating  of  the  air,  lies  in  getting  close 
and  keeping  close  to  life  as  it  is  and  to  men  as  they  are. 

To  help  men  most  effectually  in  our  day,  we  need  not  only 
a  "Free"  church  but  a  church  intelligently  and  enthusiastically 
pledged  to  the  service  of  truth  and  love, — a  church  which  will  not 
be  content  with  repeating  a  few  attenuated  phrases  rescued  from 
a  decaying  orthodoxy.  How  best  to  combine  faith  with  freedom, 
to  quicken  the  souls  of  men  with  reverence  and  trust,  while  they 
remain  fearless  in  the  pursuit  of  truth  and  stalwart  in  the  warfare 
against  sin  and  wrong,  is  a  problem  which  confronts  Unitarian  and 
other  liberal  religious  thinkers  and  workers,  not  only  in  England, 
but  all  over  the  world.  Perhaps  when  we  learn  to  lose  ourselves 
more  completely  in  the  ministry  of  religion,  and  give  ourselves  more 
unreservedly  to  the  redemption  of  mankind  from  whatever  hinders 
or  hurts,  and  to  the  service  of  whatever  ennobles  and  sanctifies, 
we  may  be  able  to  do  more  and  better  work  in  winning  men  over 
to  the  side  of  a  rational  and  reverent  faith,  and  linking  their  lives 
and  ours  with  the  life  of  God. 

The  President. — It  has  been  the  custom  of  the  Council  to  appoint 
a  Committee  on  Resolutions  to  present  resolutions  at  a  later  session. 
I  will,  therefore,  ask  Rev.  Valentine  D.  Davis,  of  London,  Dr. 
Groenewegen,  of  Leiden,  and  Rev.  N.  Jozan,  of  Budapest,  to 
serve  as  such  a  committee  and  to  report  at  the  closing  session. 

The  roots  of  religious  liberty  run  back  into  the  land  of  Martin 
Luther.  It  is  a  great  pleasure  for  us  to-day  to  welcome  the  repre- 
sentative of  our  fellow-workers  of  the  Protestantenverein,  of  Ger- 
many. We  greet  him  not  only  in  his  representative  capacity,  but 
for  himself;  for  here  is  a  man  who  has  been  obliged  to  face  danger, 
difficulty,  persecution,  for  the  cause  in  which  he  believes.  Here  is  a 
man  who  has  risen  because  he  was  not  afraid  to  fall,  a  man  who  wins 
because  he  dares  to  lose.  Dr.  Fischer  is  going  to  speak  to  us  in 
German,  but  you  will  be  able  to  follow  what  he  says  in  the  transla- 
tion which  has  been  placed  in  your  hands.  I  ask  you  to  greet  Dr. 
Max  Fischer,  of  Berlin. 


76 


THE  PROTESTANTENVEREIN  OF  GERMANY. 

BY  REV.  MAX  FISCHER,  D.D.,  OF  BERLIN,  GERMANY. 

I  greet  this  meeting  with  a  sincerely  religious  Protestant  greeting, 
as  a  delegate  of  the  German  Protestantenverein,  or  Protestant 
Association,  which  is  much  honored  and  gratified  by  your  invita- 
tion to  send  a  representative  to  this  great  and  significant  Congress. 
It  is  with  deep  emotion  that  I  stand  before  this  assembly  to-day,  in 
the  consciousness  of  a  sacred  fellowship  with  it.  The  more  com- 
plete religious  communion  we  may  enjoy  within  a  narrower  or 
denominational  circle  does  not  incapacitate  us  from  believing  that 
all  the  religious  utterances  which  come  from  humanity  are  sup- 
ported and  dominated  by  a  great  fundamental  unity. 

For  what  is  the  value  of  our  religion,  if  it  be  not  to  make  us  quick 
to  respond  to  every  symptom  of  religious  life,  to  every  thought  born 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  if  it  be  not  an  impelling  force  in  our  religious 
culture?  And  this  I  take  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  community  of 
feeling  we  enjoy  here  to-day,  that,  however  deeply  any  religious 
type  may  have  differentiated  itself  from  other  religious  types  in 
the  process  of  growth,  yet  it  is  rooted  deep  in  the  common  ground  of 
man's  religious  nature,  in  which  the  Divine  Spirit  is  ever  manifesting 
itself.  Each  one  of  us,  therefore,  should  strive  to  realize,  under 
special  national  conditions,  the  universal  religious  idea. 

In  this  spirit  I  greet  you  all.  I  offer  a  truly  Protestant  greeting 
to  all  the  Christians  who  may  be  in  sympathy  with  us,  since  we  all 
profess  the  gospel  originating  in  Jesus,  which  is  the  source  of  our 
belief  in  the  salvation  of  mankind,  through  the  "love  of  God  shed 
abroad  in  our  hearts,"  so  that  out  of  our  overflowing  peace  with 
God  the  all-perfecting  joy  of  a  child  of  God  may  fill  our  hearts. 

And  thus  I  greet  you  in  the  name  of  German  Protestantism,  our 
common  father. 

Now  permit  me  to  say  a  few  words  about  the  German  Protestant 
Association. 


77 

When,  in  the  syllabus  accompanying  the  circular  of  1864  Pius 
EX.  anathematized  modern  culture,  German  Protestantism  was 
horrified  to  see  that  the  pope  had  many  sympathizers  within  the 
Protestant  Church,  however  much  this  sympathy  was  veiled.  It 
almost  seemed  as  if  there  was  an  envious  desire  in  certain  circles 
to  be  able  to  do  likewise,  to  be  able  to  brush  aside  the  modern  de- 
mand for  increased  opportunities  of  instruction, — demands  made 
without  reference  to  the  Church,  rather  in  opposition  to  it.  At 
about  the  same  time  Daniel  Schenkel's  book  on  Jesus  appeared. 
It  was  violently  attacked  by  the  orthodox  party,  anathemas  were 
pronounced  against  a  science  which  dared  to  make  the  most  sacred 
mysteries  of  the  Church  an  object  of  investigation,  not  resting  sat- 
isfied with  the  reasonable  explanation  of  the  creeds,  but  daring  to 
put  historical  investigation  in  the  place  of  a  devout  interpretation  of 
the  fundamental  facts  of  Christianity.  No  wonder  indignation 
was  aroused.  A  hierarchy  has  ever  strangled  science,  even  within 
the  Protestant  Church,  which  in  its  beginnings  had  worked  hand 
in  hand  with  the  highest  thought  of  the  age. 

But  a  theology  conformed  to  a  hierarchy  is  not  compatible  with 
theological  science,  obeying  its  own  laws  and  applying  its  own 
methods  to  the  investigation  of  historical  and  philosophical  data. 
A  hierarchy  and  its  theology  in  Protestantism  are  "the  leaven  of 
the  Pharisees  and  scribes,"  and  must  be  rejected  from  the  Reformed 
Church. 

Symptoms  of  this  evil  spirit  manifested  themselves  in  the  intro- 
duction of  ancient  liturgies,  ancient  books  for  religious  instruction, 
in  North  and  South  Germany.  Protestantism  awoke  in  the  nation 
of  the  Reformation.  Those  who  felt  themselves  cramped  and 
threatened  in  the  Protestant  Church  had  their  eyes  opened  to  the 
Romish  danger.  They  now  saw  what  losses  the  Church  had  sus- 
tained, how  she  was  surrounded  with  enmity  and  contempt;  they 
became  aware  how  rudely  shaken  had  been  the  religious  founda- 
tion upon  which  a  higher  culture  had  once  rested.  Indeed,  a  higher 
culture  now  existed  independently  of  the  Church.  She  had  doggedly 
closed  her  doors  to  the  modern  spirit,  had  met  it  with  suspicion 
instead  of  enriching  herself  and  enlarging  her  boundaries  and  per- 
meating it  with  her  own  deep  piety. 

It  was  in  this  hour  that  the  German  Protestant  Association  was 


78 

founded,  its  object  being  to  keep  Protestantism  alive  in  the  Protes- 
tant Church,  and  thus  to  preserve  the  national  Church  for  the  nation. 

"  The  German  Protestant  Association  is  founded  by  those  German 
Protestants  who,  on  the  basis  of  the  Christian  gospel,  desire  a 
renewal  of  the  Protestant  Church  in  the  spirit  of  freedom  and  in 
harmony  with  the  general  culture  of  our  modern  time." 

With  this  declaration  the  German  Protestant  Association  unfurled 
its  banner  when  it  met  for  its  first  Congress  (Protestantentag) 
on  the  7th  and  8th  of  June,  1865,  at  Eisenach,  at  the  foot  of  the 
Wartburg.  The  very  names  of  the  men  who  had  the  leadership 
during  the  proceedings  of  those  days  are  symbols  of  Christian  piety 
and  love  of  freedom  to  the  German  nation  at  large.  Bluntschli,  the 
well-known  statesman,  occupied  the  presidential  chair.  Richard 
Rothe  and  Carl  Schwartz,  liberal  theologians,  along  with  Holtzen- 
dorf,  professor  of  jurisprudence,  were  amongst  the  speakers.  They 
represented  the  towns  of  Heidelberg,  Gotha,  and  Berlin.  The 
future  of  the  Protestant  Church  in  the  modern  world,  the  freedom 
of  Protestant  pulpit  teaching,  the  defences  against  an  ever-encroach- 
ing Romanism — these  were  the  subjects  of  deliberation.  In  fact, 
Protestant  Christianity,  by  virtue  of  its  spirit  of  freedom  and  as 
opposed  to  every  form  of  clerical  domination,  was  the  motive  power 
that  founded  the  association,  and  to  this  day  it  remains  at  once  our 
binding  duty  and  the  ideal  we  serve. 

The  Protestant  Association  has  a  new  development  of  Protestant- 
ism in  view,  when  faith  will  no  longer  bring  forth  churchly  works, 
but  will  do  God's  work  in  the  world,  when  the  affairs  of  life  will 
no  longer  be  regulated  from  the  standpoint  of  a  supernatural  and 
superhistorical  revelation,  but  be  permeated  by  the  spirit  of  truth 
and  love.  Such  a  faith  cannot  be  tied  down  to  supernatural  dog- 
mas, but  pledges  itself  in  immediate,  unreserved  abandonment  to 
God,  according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience  and  reason.  This  is 
the  "freedom  of  the  children  of  God."  The  essential  mission  of 
the  Protestant  Association  is  to  foster  this  free  religious  spirit  in 
the  Church  of  our  country,  and  this  source  of  creative  energy  will 
yet  lift  Protestantism  to  a  higher  realization  of  its  own  inherent 
principles. 

At  the  time  of  its  formation  the  German  Protestant  Association 
spread  quickly  all  over  Germany,  and  took  root  everywhere. 


79 

Certain  already  existing  societies  in  Germany,  formed  about  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  with  a  view  to  protecting  and  com- 
pleting the  fusion  between  two  branches  of  the  Reformed  Church 
(the  Lutheran  and  the  Swiss  Reformed),  joined  the  Protestant 
Association  as  branches  and  worked  under  its  name.  Congresses 
held  every  two  or  three  years  in  different  parts  of  Germany  bore 
witness  to  the  character  of  its  service,  to  its  constant  forward  move- 
ment, and  the  ever-developing  nature  of  its  ideas.  The  clearest 
'testimony  to  its  efficiency,  however,  was  borne  by  the  increasing 
enmity  of  the  orthodox  clergy  and  church  governments.  This  enmity 
took  the  form  of  persecution  and  the  deposition  of  liberal  clergy- 
men who  were  members  of  the  Protestant  Association. 

There  ensued  a  time  of  retrogression,  both  in  its  propaganda  and 
the  public  interest  in  its  work.  When  the  new  synodal  constitution 
(more  especially  within  the  Prussian  National  Church  in  1873)  had 
secured  a  measure  of  freedom  for  the  congregation,  it  was  thought 
that  the  mission  of  the  Protestant  Association  was  fulfilled.  It  was 
supposed  that  the  fostering  of  congregational  life  by  means  of  pres- 
byteries and  synods  must  admit  of  a  greater  freedom  of  movement. 
This  in  its  turn  would,  it  was  thought,  bring  about  new  forms  of  re- 
ligious life.  If  these  church  corporations  took  over  the  so-called 
"  Domestic  Mission,"  they  would  pay  special  attention  to  social 
questions,  above  everything  to  the  relations  between  the  Church  and 
the  depressed  and  wage-earning  classes  already  so  largely  estranged 
from  the  fold. 

About  the  same  time  there  arose  a  new  school  of  theological  com- 
promise which  spread  very  rapidly.  Its  aim  was  to  put  an  end  to 
the  strife  concerning  cosmic  philosophy,  the  rationalistic  and  spec- 
ulative alike.  This  new  school  of  theological  compromise  was  to 
rise  above  the  wrangling  of  schools  of  philosophy  by  what  it  deemed 
a  truly  Lutheran  method.  It  appealed  to  the  fundamental  need  of 
religion  for  the  human  heart.  This  basic  demand  for  human  nature 
was  to  be  the  sole,  all-sufficient  foundation  from  which  they  would 
derive  all  motor  power  for  the  will.  This  new  school  of  theology 
would  dispense  with  the  necessity  for  metaphysical  speculation, 
and  thus  avoid  all  the  embarrassment  arising  from  the  prob- 
lems raised  by  natural  and  historical  science.  Faith  in  God  does 
not  depend   on    ratiocinative   processes,    but   upon    the   practical 


8o 

postulate  of  a  Divine  Providence.  The  specifically  Christian  faith 
depends  upon  an  inward  experience  of  salvation  through  the  medium 
of  the  historical  Jesus.  This  immediate  inward  experience  pre- 
supposes in  Jesus  Christ  a  unique  and  mystic  power.  The  origin 
of  early  Christianity,  the  formation  of  the  gospel  traditions,  and 
kindred  questions  do  not  disturb  them.  If  pressed  to  decide  on  an 
important  matter,  they  will  not  shrink  from  subscribing  non  liquet. 

I  do  not,  of  course,  pretend  to  have  given  an  exhaustive  presen- 
tation of  this  new  school  of  theological  compromise,  which  would 
be  a  very  difficult  task  to  accomplish,  considering  how  many-sided 
it  is  and  what  mobility  of  standpoint  the  school  displays.  I  am 
equally  far  from  denying  that  there  is  a  justification  for  its  position, 
neither  do  I  deny  its  importance  in  church  life.  Notwithstanding 
the  opposition  of  orthodoxy,  it  has  succeeded  in  influencing  wide 
circles  of  church  members  in  the  direction  of  liberal  thought,  without 
challenging  the  extremes  of  either  the  old  or  the  new  school.  But 
I  doubt  whether  we  can  make  much  progress  by  their  method,  al- 
though I  admit  that  a  mediating  mode  of  procedure  is  much  more 
popular  than  ours.  I  do  not  see  any  prospect  of  disentangling  true 
piety  from  the  trammels  of  the  Old  World  supernaturalism  in  which 
it  is  held  bound  by  ancient  ecclesiastical  teaching.  Without  such  a 
liberation,  mankind  at  large  will  never  listen  to  or  conform  to  the 
gospel  of  Jesus. 

To  the  school  of  theological  compromise  in  all  its  ramifications 
our  German  Protestant  Association  must  seem  barren;  for  the  latter 
lays  its  emphasis  on  the  intellectual  life  and  its  correlative,  freedom 
of  research.  It  demands  an  open  avowal  of  the  difference  between 
the  orthodox  and  philosophical  views  of  the  universe,  not  only  in 
professors,  but  also  for  the  rank  and  file  of  the  clergy  and  for  the 
laity.  The  school  of  theological  compromise  considers  the  Protes- 
tant Association  incapable  of  religious  fervor,  hence  to  be  a  dis- 
turbing element  in  the  life  of  the  Church.  But  Carl  Holsten's 
words  still  apply  to  the  present  situation.  He  says:  "The  cardinal 
question  for  the  Protestant  Association  to  answer  in  its  mission  of 
renewing  Protestantism  in  harmony  with  modern  culture  is  this: 
What  is  the  relation  of  the  'church'  to  the  body  of  teaching  in- 
culcated by  her  own  agencies?  For  the  agonizing  dualism  must 
cease,  in  which  every  Protestant  member  finds  himself  who  lives  in 


8i 

a  world  seen  with  modern  eyes,  but  who  views  the  same  world  in 
distorted  relations  toward  God.  Thus  in  the  religious  domain  he 
upholds  an  ante-Copernican  cosmogony  and  in  the  domain  of  every- 
day experience  a  post-Copernican  theory."  "The  Protestant  con- 
science cannot  be  founded  on  the  individual  experiences  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  in  each  soul  alone,  but  in  addition  each  intelligence 
must  be  freed  to  think  the  thoughts  of  God  after  Him."  It  is  the 
unalienable  right  of  our  intelligence  to  do  this,  and  only  so  can  our 
"testimony  to  the  Divine  Word"  be  said  to  be  in  any  sense  "our 
own."  It  was  this  demand  which  brought  about  the  Reformation 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  but  the  course  of  development  taken  by 
the  church  life  of  Protestantism  forced  it  into  the  background,  if  it 
did  not  annihilate  it  altogether.  This  state  of  things  remains  to  the 
present  day,  and  necessitates  a  continual  struggle  for  freedom  of 
thought. 

The  German  Protestant  Association  must  carry  on  this  struggle. 
It  will  continue  to  work  out  the  idea  of  congregational  self-govern- 
ment within  the  larger  organizations  of  presbytery  and  synod.  The 
association  has  been  zealous  in  dealing  with  all  practical  questions 
affecting  the  religious  and  social  welfare  of  the  nation  as  a  whole 
as  well  as  of  individuals.  It  has  stirred  interest  in  those  basic 
questions  of  public  morality  upon  which  society  and  the  State  rest. 
It  has  also  displayed  great  energy  during  the  past  ten  years,  espe- 
cially at  its  Congresses  in  Berlin,  Hamburg,  Wiesbaden,  etc.,  in 
defending  the  Church's  freedom  of  teaching  in  relation  to  scientific 
theology,  with  its  correlatives  of  perfect  veracity  and  frankness 
in  the  pulpit  and  school-room.  For  we  are  convinced  that  in  these 
days  the  important  matter  is  to  enlighten  and  reassure  the  mind 
of  our  time  concerning  the  truth  of  religion  and  the  sincerity  of 
those  who  as  preachers  and  teachers  have  it  in  their  especial  keep- 
ing. 

Allow  me  to  enlarge  upon  these  remarks,  but  with  this  reserva- 
tion, that  for  what  I  shall  say  I  alone  am  responsible,  and  that  our 
society  is  not  to  be  committed  by  the  affirmations  of  one  of  its  indi- 
vidual members.  Fifty  years  ago  your  countryman,  Theodore 
Parker,  said  of  Germany,  with  respect  to  the  sovereignty  it  accorded 
to  ideas:  "Freedom  of  thought  is  allowed;  more  than  that,  it  is  en- 
couraged by  the  State;   not  so  freedom  of  speech,  still  less  freedom 


82 

of  action  resulting  therefrom.  The  State  expects,  and  in  a  measure 
endows,  research,  but  forbids  the  resultant  reform  of  old  worn-out 
traditions." 

This  is  not  the  place  in  which  to  show  you  how  far  this  state  of 
things  has  improved  amongst  us  in  the  political  and  social  spheres. 
On  the  other  hand,  I  must  confess  that  with  respect  to  ecclesiastical 
institutions,  more  especially  in  Prussia,  Parker's  criticism  is  but 
too  true  at  the  present  time.  Freedom  of  teaching  and  of  belief 
is  upheld  in  theory,  but  any  attempt  to  translate  them  into  action 
meets  with  active  opposition.  The  faculties  of  theology  at  all  the 
German  State-supported  universities  practise  unhindered  freedom 
of  investigation  and  the  evolution  of  thought,  but  the  pulpit  is 
muzzled.  There  the  ancient  creeds  must  be  upheld.  Everywhere 
the  nation  reads  and  knows  that  the  old  traditions  have  broken 
down  before  historical  science,  but  the  worshipping  congregations 
must  be  kept  in  the  dark.  Anything  like  a  joyous,  trustful  recon- 
struction of  Christian  Protestant  teaching  in  the  light  of  the  modern 
results  of  natural  and  historical  science  is  frowned  upon  by  church 
authorities.  Hence  the  German  Protestant  Association  is  bending 
all  its  energies  to  the  attainment  of  this  freedom  and  veracity  of 
mind  within  the  National  Church,  in  accordance  with  the  general 
culture  and  insight  of  our  time.  It  is  a  vital  question  for  the  highly 
instructed  German  nation  to  answer:  if  it  succeeds,  we  shall  witness 
a  new  religious  birth  of  Protestantism,  which  will  leaven  our  con- 
gregational life  and  permeate  and  assure  to  the  whole  nation  its 
highest  thought,  the  highest  products  of  its  culture. 

Christianity  I  believe  to  be  the  highest  product  of  an  evolutionary 
process  taking  place  in  mankind  under  a  divine  impulsion.  Prot- 
estantism is  the  form  of  Christianity  capable  of  leavening  a  modern 
nation  with  purest  Christianity. 

The  books  of  our  Bible  are  the  records  of  a  mighty  religious  life 
which  culminated  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus,  shedding  its  light  over  all 
the  human  family.  We  know  from  experience  how  the  religion  of 
Jesus  touches  and  awakens  a  divine  faculty  within  us,  and  how  the 
latter  is  illumined  and  assured  and  becomes  conscious  of  the  spir- 
itual unity  of  mankind.  We  appreciate  the  world-historic  signifi- 
cance of  the  entrance  of  the  religion  of  Galilee  into  the  Greek  world, 
where  it  was  to  be  wedded  with  the  philosophical  genius  of  Athens, 


83 

thus  becoming  fitted  for  its  complete  world-mission.  Thus  do  we 
conceive  the  glorious  content  of  the  message,  Salvation  from  God. 

But  we  likewise  see  that  this  religion,  in  its  primitive  form,  is 
associated  with  metaphysical  and  cosmic  notions,  with  ethical  con- 
clusions we  can  no  longer  share.  Nor  was  it  to  be  wondered  at  that 
the  central  idea  of  primitive  Christianity — the  indwelling  of  God  in 
man — failed,  at  first,  to  overcome  the  conception,  dominant  in  the 
ancient  world,  of  God  as  a  being  essentially  separate  from  and  even 
antagonistic  to  the  world.  On  the  assumption  that  there  were  two 
distinct  worlds,  a  heavenly  and  an  earthly,  sinful  one,  Christianity 
received  the  dogmatic  stamp  of  supernaturalism,  which  was  en- 
forced during  centuries  in  dogma  and  discipline,  until  the  church 
was  petrified  into  a  supernatural  institution  for  the  attainment  of 
salvation.     Thus  Rome  triumphed  over  Galilee  and  Athens  alike. 

These  conceptions  of  a  supernatural  revelation  passed  from  the 
hierarchy  of  Rome  into  the  Church  of  the  Reformation,  at  least  in  its 
official  forms.  The  religious  life  of  the  individual,  despite  his  Prot- 
estant conviction  of  the  inwardness  and  freedom  of  all  true  religion, 
is  riveted  to  these  supernatural  dogmas.  As  an  indispensable  pre- 
liminary to  faith,  he  is  required  to  believe  that  certain  supernatural 
events  have  taken  place:  these  events,  not  having  anything  religious 
about  them,  are  made  to  appear  so.  More  than  this,  the  belief  that 
these  events  occurred  partakes  of  the  Romish  faith,  inasmuch  as  it 
is  considered  specially  meritorious  when  it  is  opposed  to  the  dic- 
tates of  reason.  Are  we,  then,  to  sacrifice  the  intellect  in  the  name 
of  God  who  endowed  us  with  the  power  of  thought  and  who  guides 
its  development?  Or  are  we  to  exclude  those  who  cannot  make 
the  sacrifice  from  participation  in  our  religious  communion  ?  Or  are 
we  simply  to  ignore  all  questionings  as  to  an  ultimate  cause  and 
leave  religion  hovering  in  the  air? 

Professor  Pfleiderer  characterizes  Protestantism  as  deep  religious 
inwardness  of  the  devout  personality  and  entire  independence  of  any 
mediatory  agency.  Is  that  not  the  exact  expression  of  our  under- 
standing of  Jesus  (so  far  as  our  imperfect  knowledge  of  his  person- 
ality reaches),  and  has  not  the  Christian  world  seized  upon  these 
very  characteristics  with  all  the  certainty  of  religious  intuition,  as 
the  essential  spirit  of  his  gospel,  as  the  germ  of  the  religious  spirit 
in  Christianity?    And  if,  on  the  other  hand,  through  the  progress  of 


84 

knowledge  the  dualism  between  heaven  and  earth  is  overcome,  and 
supernaturalism  becomes  impossible  in  scientific  theology,  can  such 
a  change  endanger  the  inward  personal  religion  which  is  the  Protes- 
tant faith?  Quite  the  contrary.  The  oneness  of  God  and  man  is 
the  postulate  upon  which  the  immanency  of  God  in  man  can  rest. 
It  makes  the  relation  thinkable.  The  divine  sonship  of  mankind, 
according  to  the  religious  teaching  of  the  gospel,  is  only  realized  in 
the  light  of  our  modern  conception  of  the  immanence  of  the  Divine 
Being. 

Nothing  of  the  work  Jesus  did  for  mankind,  no  part  of  our  re- 
ligious inheritance  of  any  permanent  value,  has  been  lost  by  our 
progress  in  knowledge.  This  enlargement  of  our  horizon  should 
not  merely  be  received  with  sufferance,  it  should  be  welcomed,  and 
we  should  do  all  in  our  power  to  further  it. 

True,  Jesus'  teaching  was  not  a  complete,  compact  system, 
capable  of  being  transplanted  bodily  into  any  or  every  zone,  any 
more  than  he  himself  can  be  transplanted  and  fitted  into  any  sub- 
sequent time.  His  personality,  his  teaching,  and  his  fate,  together 
with  his  disciples,  his  listeners,  his  enemies,  the  company  of  fol- 
lowers who  worshipped  him, — all  these  taken  together  form  a  concrete, 
historical  picture,  with  Galilee  and  Jerusalem  as  its  background. 
Such  a  picture  cannot  be  simply  reproduced,  it  cannot  be  an  un- 
questioned authority  in  all  its  unique  details  for  after-times.  Yet 
it  will  always  be  historically  accessible  to  us:  we  return  to  it  as  to  an 
inexhaustible  spring  at  which  to  quench  our  thirst,  where  we  listen 
to  what  "the  Spirit  saith  unto  the  churches."  Returning  to  our 
labors  with  new  inspiration,  we  try  to  embody  it  freely  in  forms 
suited  to  our  country  and  our  time.  We  acknowledge  and  hold  fast 
the  bond  which  links  our  people  to  those  wonderful  workings  of 
God's  spirit  in  Galilee,  culminating  in  the  ideal  of  humanity.  We 
recognize  these  events  as  having  been  pregnant  with  meaning  for  all 
mankind,  but  we  also  know  that  Teutonic  Christianity  has  an  in- 
dividuality distinct  from  the  Semitic-Greek  or  Roman,  hitherto  the 
primary  factors  in  shaping  Christianity.  The  task  before  us  now 
is  to  work  out  the  Christian  idea  into  forms  suited  to  our  time  and 
people.  In  this  sense  must  the  scribe,  who  is  a  disciple  of  the  heav- 
enly kingdom,  as  Jesus  was,  and  who,  "like  a  householder  from 
his  store,   bringeth   forth   things  old   and   new,"   speak  from   the 


REV.  EDWARD  EVERETT  HALE,  D.D. 
Boston,  Mass. 


MRS.  JULIA  WARD  HOWE 
Boston,  Mass. 


REV.  THOMAS  R.  SLICER 
New  York,  N.Y. 


BOOKER  T.  WASHINGTON,  LL.D. 
Tuskegee,  Ala. 


*<LLFORN.U 


85 

pulpit  with  the  full  consciousness  that  he  is  uttering  things  that  are 
new. 

This  must  not,  of  course,  be  done  by  straining  to  bring  it  into 
accord  with  dogmatic  teaching:  it  must  be  based  upon  a  liberal 
theology.  We  must  not  "reinterpret,"  but  must  simply  try  to  clothe 
the  idea  of  Christianity  in  forms  our  modern  congregations  can  as- 
similate. Above  all,  we  must  get  rid  of  the  conceptions  of  the  old 
Christology;  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  very  God,  whose  deity  domi- 
nates his  historical  career.  These  figures  can  mean  nothing  to  us. 
Let  us  only  become  possessed  by  the  splendor  of  the  Idea  originated 
by  Jesus,  which  upheld  him  and  his  work,  which  has  been  a  mighty 
impelling  force  through  centuries  of  human  history.  Let  it  become 
a  living  energy  within  us,  to  create  fresh  ideals.  Then  shall  we  no 
longer  be  as  strangers  to  our  own  time  in  the  religious  sphere.  We 
shall  proclaim  the  faith  that  is  in  us,  in  our  own  tongue,  and  our 
listeners  will  hear  "the  great  things  that  God  has  done"  in  familiar 
speech. 

The  immense  difficulty  of  this  task  does  not  absolve  us  from  the 
duty  of  striving  to  fulfil  it,  remembering  that  we  only  "know  in 
part."  But  let  us  take  comfort  in  the  thought  that  truth  thus 
gained  in  the  evolutionary  process  of  religious  thought  can  no  more 
perish  than  the  falsehood  of  our  present  religious  expression  can 
be  saved.  Let  us  only  be  sure  not  to  retard  the  progress  of  truth 
by  clinging  to  antiquated  forms  instead  of  serving  the  good  cause 
by  unwearied  research  and  endeavor. 

Shortly,  to  sum  up  what  seems  to  me  the  most  urgent  reform  of  the 
moment :  We  must  liberate  the  religious  consciousness  of  the  present 
generation  from  the  outworn  Christology  of  the  Church,  and  clear 
the  way  for  a  return  to  the  primitive  belief  in  God,  as  held  by  Jesus 
himself.  Salvation  will  then  no  longer  be  attained  through  the 
mediation  of  a  God-man  or  a  human  being  with  divine  functions 
and  powers.  Salvation  will  come  through  the  consciousness  of  the 
indwelling  Presence  of  God  in  the  human  soul,  whose  ethical  realiza- 
tion in  thought  and  life  is  in  itself  salvation. 

Frequent  use  has  been  made  of  this  freedom  in  pulpit  teaching 
in  the  National  Protestant  Church  of  Prussia,  more  particularly  in 
recent  times.  This  has  frequently  led  to  conflicts  between  individual 
preachers  and  church  authorities.    The  old  and  orthodox  school 


86 

looks  upon  itself  as  the  only  legitimate  representative  of  the  Church, 
because  it  stands  for  the  dogmas  of  the  Church.  It  denies  the  right 
of  a  liberal  clergyman  to  preach,  and  of  a  liberal  congregation  to 
choose  a  man  of  their  own  way  of  thinking.  The  judgments  of 
the  Supreme  Ecclesiastical  Courts,  even  when  they  did  not  go  the 
length  of  depriving  a  clergyman  of  his  charge,  and  where  they  sought 
other  legal  grounds  for  vetoing  an  appointment,  nevertheless  plainly 
showed  that  they  were  on  the  side  of  orthodoxy. 

The  question  has  often  enough  been  raised  by  the  enemies  of 
liberal  theology  and  some  of  its  friends:  Why  remain  in  a  church 
with  which  you  do  not  agree  and  which  does  not  recognize  your 
right  as  a  member  ?  Why  not  step  out  of  the  Church,  and  found  a 
new  and  free  church  for  yourselves  ?  This  question  of  church  inde- 
pendence is  one  which  will  always  be  conditioned  and  decided  by 
the  peculiar  circumstances  and  history  of  the  country  in  which  the 
question  arises,  and  it  cannot  be  answered  either  way,  apart  from 
the  concrete  circumstances  under  which  it  arose.  But  the  general 
question  may  be  asked:  Do  secession  and  the  growth  of  sects  pro- 
mote the  truly  Protestant  ideal  of  the  freedom  of  the  religious  per- 
sonality? Does  such  a  state  of  things  insure  progress  in  religious 
culture?  Freedom  for  the  church  is  no  guarantee  of  freedom  in 
the  Church.  Separatist  groups  that  have  originated — not  in  the  wide 
inspiration  of  the  Christian  idea,  but  from  the  longing  to  satisfy 
some  need  not  met  in  the  larger  Church, — run  great  danger  of  de- 
veloping a  more  rigid  despotism  over  individual  religious  person- 
ality. Of  course,  individuals  may  always  escape  from  such  a  tyranny; 
but  what  about  the  majority  that  suffers  the  pressure  unconsciously  ? 
More  than  this,  they  may  fanatically  put  pressure  on  themselves 
and  others,  to  the  great  injury  of  all  religious  personality.  And 
what  about  religious  progress?  I  cannot  see  that  it  lies  in  the 
direction  of  a  multiplication  of  separatist  groups  in  religion.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  most  of  the  existing  sects  are  founded  upon  orthodox 
dogmas  or  they  practise  a  species  of  church  discipline  and  require 
a  certain  measure  of  conformity  on  the  part  of  their  members.  On 
the  other  hand,  a  national  church  does  not  necessarily  imply  uni- 
formity in  every  particular  of  religious  and  ethical  belief.  The 
Episcopal  Church  of  England  is  a  case  in  point,  in  which  opposites 
are  held  together  by  a  common  bond.    In  my  opinion  the  very 


87 

friction  caused  in  the  Church  is  a  means  of  progress  in  religious  truth. 
Moreover,  a  national  church  is  the  best  organization  possible  for 
bringing  religious  ideas  before  the  masses  of  the  population.  The 
German  Protestant  Association  is,  at  any  rate,  quite  assured  of  its 
right  and  its  duty  to  prosecute  its  work  of  religious  liberalization 
within  the  pale  of  the  National  Church  of  Germany,  and  it  has  no 
motive  for  relinquishing  this  position. 

Our  German  Protestant  population  consciously  and  unconsciously 
adheres  to  the  National  Church  of  the  Reformation,  whilst  by  instinct 
it  remains  faithful  to  Christianity,  as  part  and  parcel  of  its  national 
existence.  But  notice  here  a  distinction.  The  German  Protestant 
Church  is  the  Church  of  the  nation,  not  the  Church  of  the  State.  To 
those  at  a  distance  these  terms  might  seem  identical,  and  victims 
of  state  encroachments  on  religious  life  might  be  tempted  to  consider 
them  as  such.  But  the  Protestant  Church  of  Germany  has  means 
and  powers  within  it  which  are  capable  of  overcoming  and  defying 
hierarchical  and  Byzantic  pretensions.  The  recognition  of  the 
Church  by  the  State  is  not  the  essential  feature  on  which  it  founds, 
nor  are  the  ecclesiastical  functions  exercised  by  the  sovereign  of  the 
land  an  appendage  of  his  political  power.  The  National  Church  has 
an  undoubted  legal  right  to  resist  any  encroachments  upon  its  re- 
ligious life  which  its  bond  with  the  civil  power  may  bring  about. 
It  is  here  that  the  German  Protestant  Association  begins  its  work. 
Callous  to  the  reproaches  of  orthodoxy  as  to  the  illegitimacy  of  our 
position  within  a  national  church,  we  cling  to  our  inheritance  on 
historical,  legal,  and  Protestant  grounds.  Here  we  know  ourself 
within  a  sphere  of  national  religious  life  which  has  grown  historically, 
and  it  is  our  sacred  duty  to  labor  for  the  future  of  this  Church  in  the 
direction  of  our  ideal  of  religious  freedom.  Our  German  national 
churches  can  and  must  become  the  nurseries  and  strongholds  of  a 
new  Protestant  piety;  the  spirit  of  our  Reformers  will  revive  and 
ally  itself  with  the  humanitarian  ideal  of  our  greatest  poets  and 
philosophers.  On  the  other  hand,  this  soaring  tendency  of  the  Ger- 
man mind  will  be  balanced  by  the  newly  awakened  and  disciplined 
capacity  to  realize  ideals  in  the  various  spheres  of  social  and  ethical 
life  of  our  nation.  Then  we  may  realize  the  Divine  Presence  within 
us,  and  be  able  to  say,  "It  is  my  meat  and  drink  to  do  the  will  of 
him  that  sent  me,"  and  to  fulfil  my  work. 


88 

The  apostle  Paul  had  an  apocalyptic  vision  of  the  moment  of 
entry  into  eternity,  when  even  the  Son  shall  bow  down  before  Him 
who  had  put  all  things  under  his  feet,  "that  God  may  be  all  in  all." 
We  do  not  need  to  await  any  such  catastrophe:  we  know  Christ  does 
not  govern  us  from  the  heavens,  nor  does  he  unite  himself  only  by 
duly  appointed  sacraments  with  the  believing  soul.  We  know 
that  the  Christ  of  God  is  generated  within  the  religious  spirit  of 
man,  and  it  is  in  the  conviction  that  in  him  is  realized  the  true  ideal 
of  humanity  that  we  joyfully  declare,  "God,  all  in  all." 

The  President. — Professor  Jean  Reville  has  been  identified  with 
this  Council  from  the  beginning.  He  has  been  at  every  session  of  the 
Council.  He  has  served  on  the  Executive  Committee  from  the 
start.  He  has  always  been  our  well-beloved,  genial,  and  patient 
friend  and  teacher  and  inspirer.  He  is  going  to  speak  to  you  this 
morning  of  the  dramatic  situation  in  his  own  land,  "The  Religious 
Crisis  in  France."    Professor  Jean  Reville. 


89 


THE  SITUATION  OF   THE  CHURCHES   IN  FRANCE 

AFTER  THE  SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH 

AND  STATE. 

BY  JEAN  REVILLE,  PROFESSOR  AT  THE  COLLEGE  DE  FRANCE  (PARIS). 

The  paper  which  I  have  the  honor  of  presenting  to  this  Congress 
does  not  refer  to  the  new  organization  which  the  Protestant  churches 
of  all  denominations  have  elaborated  in  France  since  the  law  on  the 
separation  of  Church  and  State  began  to  have  force.  My  honor- 
able colleague,  Professor  Bonet-Maury,  has  undertaken  to  speak 
on  that  subject  before  the  Congress.  He  will  also  explain  to  you 
the  endeavors  that  were  made  to  unite  the  different  Protestant 
denominations. 

My  task  is  an  attempt  to  describe  in  a  general  way  the  conse- 
quences of  the  separation  law  on  the  religious  and  ecclesiastical 
situation  of  France,  and,  as  the  great  majority  of  French  people 
belong  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  (at  least  by  name),  it  is  of 
that  Church  that  I  shall  speak  mostly.  The  experience  that  has 
just  been  had  in  France  is  of  such  importance  to  the  Old  World 
that  it  is  worth  while  for  men  of  all  lands  to  interest  themselves 
in  it. 

In  the  paper  I  read  to  the  Geneva  Congress  in  1905,  before  the 
definitive  vote  of  the  law,  I  said:  "Its  worth  will  above  all  depend 
on  the  manner  in  which  it  is  applied.  With  a  liberal  and  tolerant 
government  it  can  strongly  assure  the  freedom  of  conscience,  but 
with  a  clerical  or  with  an  unreligious  government  it  may  become 
a  terrible  power  of  oppression." 

Now  my  first  statement,  after  nearly  two  years'  trial,  is  that  the 
law  has  really  been  applied  in  a  thoroughly  liberal  manner. 

My  second  statement  is  that  in  general  it  has  not  throughout 
the  whole  country  raised  such  disturbances  as  its  antagonists  had 
prophesied  and  as  I  myself,  at  Geneva,   feared.     There  have  been 


9° 

local  agitations,  partial  disturbances,  attempts  at  resistance  made 
in  certain  small  groups  of  society.  But,  on  the  whole,  the  great 
bulk  of  the  nation  remained  perfectly  calm  in  spite  of  all  endeavors 
to  arouse  them  against  the  law. 

We  can  each  day  observe  that  the  mass  of  the  people  is  far  more 
agitated  by  ideas  of  social  reform  than  by  the  separation  of  Church 
and  State.  The  coolness  towards  the  Catholic  faith  in  the  French 
people,  especially  amongst  men,  may  account  for  this  in  a  large 
degree,  but  also  and  chiefly  the  broad  and  liberal  manner  in  which 
this  important  ecclesiastical  reform  has  been  carried  into  execution. 
Freedom  of  conscience  has  throughout  been  respected,  and  public 
worship  nearly  everywhere  celebrated  as  before. 

These  affirmations  may  perhaps  astonish  many  people  in  this  coun- 
try. I  know  things  have  been  presented  otherwise,  and  that  the 
French  Republic  has  been  accused  of  the  spoliation  and  persecution 
of  the  Churches,  especially  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Such 
a  verdict  is  utterly  inaccurate.  In  France  those  who  complain 
to-day  that  they  do  not  possess  religious  freedom  are  only  those  for 
whom  liberty  consists  in  being  able  to  do  themselves  all  they  like 
without  taking  any  heed  of  the  equal  rights  of  others.  Never  was 
there  in  France  so  much  religious  freedom  as  now.  True,  there 
are  men,  and  even  political  groups,  who  would  gladly  avail  them- 
selves of  the  situation  to  ruin  Catholicism  and  even  any  kind  of 
religion.  But  it  is  false  to  say  that  this  tendency  has  prevailed  and 
that  there  has  been  any  persecution. 

To  prove  this,  it  is  sufficient  to  recall  the  facts.  The  main  point, 
which  commands  the  whole  situation,  is  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  refused  to  submit  to  the  law  voted  in  Parliament  by  a  very 
large  majority  and  ratified  afterwards  by  a  still  larger  majority 
in  the  general  elections. 

Whilst  all  other  Churches — Lutheran,  Calvinist,  Protestant  of 
every  denomination,  Jewish,  etc. — submitted  without  any  recrimi- 
nation, and  immediately  set  to  work  at  reorganizing  themselves 
according  to  the  prescriptions  of  the  new  law,  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  refused  to  do  so,  and — still  worse — her  refusal  was  according 
to  the  pope's  command,  although  a  large  majority  of  the  French 
bishops  had  given  an  opposite  advice.  These,  having  met,  on  the 
pope's  invitation,  in  secret  council,  were  in  favor  of   accepting  the 


9i 

law,  but  the  pope,  though  he  declared  publicly  that  he  was  acting 
in  conformity  with  their  wish,  decided  that  the  French  Catholics 
must  refuse  submission  to  the  law.  This  is  certainly  one  of  the 
most  curious  things  in  modern  religious  history.  And  what  is 
still  more  characteristic  is  that  all  the  bishops  yielded  without  any 
protest. 

This  is  the  essential  cause  of  all  the  difficulties  amidst  which  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  struggles  in  France.  It  should  be  well 
understood,  indeed,  that  the  situation  cannot  be  the  same  in  an 
old  country  like  France,  where  during  fourteen  centuries  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  has  been  united  to  the  State,  as  it  is  in  the  United 
States  of  America,  where  the  Churches  and  the  States  have  from 
the  beginning  been  entirely  separate  and  distinct  the  one  from  the 
other.  Legally,  the  Church  in  France,  until  the  day  of  the  separation, 
fulfilled  a  public  and  official  function.  The  churches  and  temples 
were  state  or  "commune"  properties,  wherever  they  had  not  been 
built  by  a  private  association  consistent  with  the  French  law,  and 
which  had  expressly  reserved  its  right  of  property.  The  bishop  did 
not  possess  church  properties  as  a  private  citizen:  he  ruled  them 
only  as  head  of  the  bishopric;  his  diocese  was  an  official  subdivi- 
sion of  the  country  of  which  he  was  the  governor  during  his  life, 
and  after  his  death  the  State  appointed  a  successor  after  agreement 
with  the  pope.  A  non-authorized  monastic  order,  such  as  that  of 
the  Jesuits  or  Dominicans,  could  not  legally  possess,  since  it  did 
not  even  legally  exist. 

The  aim  of  the  law  of  separation  was  not  only  to  suppress  the 
religious  budget  of  the  State, — that  is,  to  ordain  that  clergymen 
should  no  more  be  remunerated  by  the  State  but  by  their  flock 
(that  was  a  very  simple  matter), — but  its  chief  aim  (and  a  much  more 
difficult  one)  was  to  determine  under  which  legal  form  there  could  be 
constituted  private  societies  qualified  to  enter  upon  the  goods  and 
properties  of  the  parishes,  and  to  use  the  church  buildings  which 
belong  to  the  State  or  the  "communes";  also  with  what  resources 
these  private  societies  should  be  allowed  to  provide  regularly  for  the 
maintenance  of  worship.  Anybody  whatever  could  not  be  author- 
ized to  enter  into  possession  of  these  goods  and  properties,  and  it 
was  not  possible  to  allow  the  ecclesiastics  actually  in  charge  to  dis- 
pose of  them  according  to  their  own  personal  convenience. 


92 

Hence  the  law  determined  they  should  be  delivered  to  cultual  as- 
sociations (associations  cultuelles)  of  a  special  type.  There  were 
to  be  private  societies,  consisting  of  at  least  seven,  fifteen,  or  twenty- 
five  members,  according  to  the  importance  of  the  parish,  on  condi- 
tion that  they  conform  themselves  to  the  general  conditions  of  the 
cult  or  worship  whose  exercises  they  proposed  to  assume.  This  was 
to  prevent  a  cultual  association  from  transferring  to  another  wor- 
ship the  goods  it  claimed. 

The  members  of  the  Catholic  party  in  Parliament  had  greatly  in- 
sisted on  this  clause,  and  declared  that  if  it  were  passed  all  Catholics 
would  accept  the  new  organization.  Thereupon  this  condition  was 
granted  to  them,  though  it  would  have  been  in  better  conformity 
with  democratic  principles  to  permit  the  members  of  each  parish 
to  decide  for  themselves  what  sort  of  worship  they  intended  to  cele- 
brate in  their  own  church.  But  the  Catholics  feared  that,  if  this 
were  done,  in  many  parishes  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  would  be 
forsaken. 

The  only  other  obligation  imposed  on  each  of  these  associations 
cultuelles  was  that  they  present  every  year  their  budget  to  the  gen- 
eral assembly  of  its  members,  as  is  usual  in  all  private  societies. 
Note  here  that  the  association  might  remain  limited  to  the  small 
number  of  its  founders,  a  small  group  renewed  by  its  own  choice, 
and  which  the  bishops  could  have  formed  in  every  parish  from 
among  their  own  supporters,  whilst  the  rest  of  the  flock  might  yet 
be  admitted  as  outside  members  without  the  right  of  voting  in  the 
assembly.  The  prescriptions  were  really  not  tyrannical.  Neverthe- 
less the  pope  declared  them  unacceptable. 

Besides,  to  prepare  the  transfer  of  goods,  the  law  decreed  an  in- 
ventory to  be  drawn  up  previously  in  each  parish,  so  as  to  establish 
the  nature  and  origin  of  the  properties.  Nothing  could  have  been 
more  just  and  nothing  better  done  to  protect  churches  against  spolia- 
tion or  misappropriation.  In  all  Protestant  churches  these  inven- 
tories were  drawn  up  readily.  Oh  the  contrary,  in  many  places 
the  Catholics  assaulted  the  government's  officers  who  came  for  the 
inventory,  or  barricaded  themselves  in  the  churches,  throwing  in- 
sults and  even  filth  on  the  police,  and  shouting,  "We  want  God," 
as  if  God  was  to  be  stolen !  True,  these  violences  were  not  provoked 
by  the  dignitaries  of  the  churches,  but  by  the  leaders  of  the  reaction- 


93 

ist  political  party.  But  the  priests  did  nothing  to  prevent  these 
acts  of  violence,  and  in  the  mind  of  the  people  they  bear  the  respon- 
sibility for  them. 

The  refusal  to  constitute  cultual  associations  was  a  still  more 
serious  matter.  Because  of  it  no  legal  body  could  receive  the  prop- 
erties of  the  parishes  or  even  make  use  of  the  church  buildings. 
This  was  the  most  critical  moment  in  the  application  of  the  law. 
Was  the  government  to  close  the  churches,  urging  that  they  were 
escheated  properties?  This  would  have  greatly  satisfied  all  unre- 
ligious  fanatics.  M.  Briand,  the  minister  who  had  the  responsi- 
bility of  all  this  business,  and  who  had  made  the  report  of  the  law  of 
separation  in  Parliament,  thought,  with  high  wisdom,  that  he  must, 
above  all,  assure  the  freedom  of  conscience  and  secure  liberty  of 
worship.  A  new  law  was  passed  on  January  2, 1907,  by  which  church 
buildings  were  left  for  use  to  the  flocks  and  to  the  ministers  of 
worship  without  any  conditions,  wheresoever  a  cultual  association 
had  not  been  formed  to  claim  their  use  according  to  the  law  of 
separation  in  1905.  Worship  could  henceforth  be  celebrated  as 
previously.  But  all  the  churches'  properties,  the  archiepiscopal 
or  bishops'  palaces,  parsonages,  seminaries,  remained  the  property 
of  the  State  or  "communes,"  since  no  regular  society  had  been 
constituted  to  claim  them.  And  the  salaries  or  allowances  which, 
according  to  the  law,  the  State  was  to  pay  to  all  priests  for  four  years 
more,  were  suppressed,  since  the  priests  had  refused  to  apply  the 
law.  It  was  but  strict  justice.  By  his  obstinacy  in  opposing  him- 
self to  the  judgment  of  the  French  bishops  the  pope  caused  the 
Catholic  Church  of  France  to  lose  all  its  goods  and  properties,  esti- 
mated at  about  four  hundred  millions  of  francs,  and  deprived  the 
French  priests  of  the  allowances  the  State  had  bestowed  upon  them. 
So  this  was  not  a  spoliation  by  the  State.  It  was  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church  itself,  which  refused  to  arrange  matters,  as  all  other 
Churches  did,  so  as  to  enter  upon  the  enjoyment  of  its  properties. 

Why  did  the  pope  act  thus?  Solely  in  Rome's  and  the  Roman 
see's  interest.  He  declared  the  cultual  associations  to  be  adverse 
to  the  canon  law,  according  to  which  the  churches  ought  to  be  gov- 
erned by  the  bishops,  and  not  by  the  congregations.  But  we  have 
already  seen  that  the  share  of  influence  left  to  the  parishioners  by 
the  separation  law  was  very  small,  as  so  few  persons  were  required 


94 

to  form  the  cultual  associations  (seven,  fifteen,  or  twenty-five),  and 
as  in  most  places  the  bishops  could  have  formed  it  exclusively  out 
of  members  of  the  clergy  and  people  entirely  devoted  to  them.  Even 
that,  however,  seemed  to  the  pope  a  dangerous  concession  to  the 
democratic  spirit.  Besides,  the  priest  would  have  had  a  certain 
independence  in  each  parish,  and  the  pope  desired  the  priests  to  de- 
pend absolutely  on  the  bishop.  As  he  now  alone  appoints  the 
bishops,  these  in  their  turn  depend  absolutely  on  him.  The  result 
is  that  the  pope  is  now  the  absolute  and  unique  master  of  the 
Catholic  Church  in  France.  He  probably  thought  this  power  was 
worth  the  four  hundred  millions,  especially  as  it  was  not  out  of  his 
own  money  that  they  were  paid. 

Such  is,  in  fact,  for  the  Roman  Catholics  the  most  evident  result 
of  the  separation.  Never  was  the  Catholic  Church  of  France  so 
free  in  its  attitude  towards  the  State  as  it  is  now,  but  also  never  was 
it  so  completely  dependent  on  the  pope.  Previously  the  government 
appointed  the  bishops  after  agreement  with  the  pope:  now  the 
pope  alone  appoints  them  directly,  and  he  chooses  the  most  ultra- 
montane and  reactionary  ones.  Previously  the  curates  were  ap- 
pointed permanently:  now  they  are  appointed  and  removed  by  the 
bishops.  Previously  the  financial  management  of  the  parish  was 
controlled  by  the  public  authorities:  now  the  bishops  appointed  by 
the  pope  are  not  accountable  to  any  one  for  their  management, 
excepting  to  the  pope. 

The  financial  organization  is  not  yet  definitely  settled.  Different 
measures  have  been  taken  for  the  time  in  the  dioceses.  Neverthe- 
less, one  point  is  fixed  everywhere.  In  each  diocese  all  the  resources 
are  centralized  in  the  hands  of  the  bishop,  henceforth  as  powerful 
in  temporal  as  in  spiritual  concerns.  For  the  present  the  organiza- 
tion of  an  inter-diocesan  fund  is  under  consideration,  which  is  to 
divide  among  the  poor  parishes  the  surplus  returns  of  the  rich  par- 
ishes, and  this  general  fund  will  certainly  be  placed  under  the  direc- 
tion of  an  apostolic  legate ;  that  is,  a  delegate  of  the  pope. 

What  the  opponents  of  the  separation  in  France  foresaw  is  about 
to  be  realized.  The  separation  will,  above  all,  be  profitable  to  the 
Roman  power.  The  last  remnants  of  the  Gallican  liberties  (that  is, 
to  say  the  particular  rights  belonging  to  the  Churches  of  France)  are 
vanishing  away.    To  the  more  and  more  democratic  organization 


95 

of  the  State  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  opposes  a  more  and  more 
centralized  and  tyrannical  organization. 

We  must  add  that  the  actual  pope  strives  with  the  greatest  energy 
against  the  liberal  spirit  which  had  begun  to  diffuse  itself  over  the 
younger  clergy  in  France.  A  scientific  and  theological  renovation 
was  actually  developing  in  the  Catholic  publications  and  Catholic 
schools  under  the  influence  of  the  Abbe*  Loisy,  Laberthenniere,  and 
the  Abbe*  Houtin,  whom  we  have  the  privilege  of  seeing  amongst  us 
at  this  Congress,  and  of  many  others.  Their  books  are  now  under 
interdict,  their  periodical  publications  forbidden  to  the  clergy,  and 
all  possible  measures  are  taken  to  keep  away  from  the  seminaries 
their  dangerous  influence. 

The  pope's  last  Syllabus,  recently  promulgated,  discloses  to  the 
whole  world  the  spirit  of  ignorance  and  obscurantism  prevailing  in 
Rome.  The  pope  carries  to  the  utmost  his  intellectual  absolutism 
as  well  as  his  ecclesiastical  absolutism.  The  schism  between  the 
public  mind  and  the  Roman  Catholic  mind,  between  Church  and 
School,  thus  grows  worse  every  day.  And  it  is  a  serious  and  sad 
question  how  such  a  situation  may  be  solved. 

The  masses  in  France  are  indifferent  to  all  these  matters,  but 
they  forsake  more  and  more  the  Catholic  faith.  All  that  the  people 
desire  is  to  attend  mass,  to  be  christened,  married,  and  buried  at 
church.  They  no  longer  believe  the  doctrines,  but  they  love  the 
ceremonies.  And  in  proportion  as  the  new  generations,  educated 
in  the  secular  lay  schools,  grow  up,  this  state  of  mind  augments. 

Some  men  of  great  sense,  and  amongst  them  my  friend  Paul 
Sabatier,  with  whose  greetings  for  the  Congress  I  am  intrusted, 
think  that  a  reaction  will  ensue  from  the  exaggeration  of  this  papal 
absolutism.  They  hope  to  see  men,  better  instructed  as  to  the  true 
welfare  of  the  Church,  take  in  hand  a  reform  of  Catholicism.  They 
hope  for  a  real  Catholic  regeneration,  both  democratic  and  scien- 
tific, wherein  old  dogmas  shall  be  left  to  sleep  in  peace  and  all  ener- 
gies shall  be  consecrated  to  the  social  and  moral  work. 

Would  to  God  it  were  so!  I  must  say,  I  do  not  believe  much  in 
their  prophecies.  They  are  generous  delusions.  In  this  neo- 
Catholic  movement  there  are  high-minded  individuals,  men  of  great 
talent  and  remarkable  knowledge.  But  they  are  officers  without 
soldiers.     And,  above  all,  there  is  in  this  new  movement  a  funda- 


96 

mental  contradiction  which  in  the  end  must  paralyze  it.  They 
intend  to  remain  Roman  Catholics  (that  is  to  say,  submitted  to  the 
pope),  and  they  stand  up  for  a  cause  condemned  by  the  pope.  You 
will  say,  A  pope  does  not  live  forever:  after  this  one,  who  is  cer- 
tainly a  very  narrow-minded  man,  there  may  come  others  with  a 
more  open  mind,  and  amongst  them  one  who  may  take  in  hand 
the  cause  of  Catholic  reform.  There,  in  my  opinion,  they  are  at 
fault.  No  pope,  even  if  he  were  as  liberal  and  well-informed  as  we 
may  suppose,  will  ever  be  willing  to  work  out  such  a  reform,  and, 
even  if  he  were  willing,  he  would  not  be  able  to  do  it.  Such  a  re- 
form would  be  the  beheading  of  the  papacy  itself,  for  the  papacy 
is  itself  the  real  impediment  for  any  Catholic  reform.  The  whole 
history  of  the  Church  shows  us  that  ever  since  the  thirteenth  century 
all  reforms  of  the  Church  proceeded  from  the  people  or  lower  clergy, 
and  that  the  popes,  even  when  they  attempted  to  be  reformers,  made 
the  reform  turn  to  the  increase  of  their  power.  Catholicism  may 
perhaps  reform  itself,  but  it  can  only  be  from  the  root,  against  Rome 
and  not  with  Rome.  The  Roman  organism  may  burst  asunder 
from  an  excess  of  centralization,  but  it  is  not  possible  to  change  it 
in  a  secular  direction. 

The  true  Catholic  ideal  is  very  high,  very  great,  very  Christian. 
In  our  modern  world  it  can  no  longer  be  dogmatic  or  authoritative. 
It  can  be  solely  moral  and  religious, — a  unity  of  hearts  according 
to  the  principles  of  the  gospel  amid  all  the  varieties  of  life.  But 
this  ideal  is  not  and  cannot  be  the  Roman  one.  To-day,  as  for- 
merly, the  first  condition  of  spiritual  liberty  and  religious  reform 
is,  "No  Popery!" 

Will  the  Catholic  Church  in  our  Latin  countries  reform  itself 
from  the  root?  I  do  not  know,  and  I  think  nobody  can  know. 
At  present  I  foresee  no  issue  to  the  ecclesiastical  and  religious  situa- 
tion in  France,  unless  it  be  great  commotions. 

France  has  no  inclination  for  Protestantism.  There  is  no  prob- 
ability that  the  majority  will  ever  become  Protestants.  Only  a 
small  number  of  cultivated  and  deliberate  minds  adopt  that  solu- 
tion. Besides,  there  is  actually  not  enough  real  faith  in  the  masses 
of  the  people  for  them  to  uphold  a  reform. 

Two  alternatives  seem  to  me  possible.  Either  the  existing  reac- 
tionist movement  of  the  Catholic  Church  will  go  on,  and  public  life 


97 

in  France  will  for  a  long  time  be  dominated  by  the  strife  between 
clericals  and  more  or  less  socialist  radicals,  or  else  the  Catholic 
Church  of  France,  conscious  of  its  error,  will  seek  to  regain  on  the 
social  ground  the  situation  it  is  losing  every  day  more  on  the  religious 
ground.  A  Catholic  Socialism  will  grow  up,  and  public  life  will  be 
dominated  by  the  strife  between  Catholic  Socialism  and  anti-Cath- 
olic Socialism,  which  in  a  country  like  France  will  necessarily  be  an 
unreligious  socialism.  In  either  case  the  situation  will  not  be  favor- 
able to  liberalism  and  liberal  religion. 

But  it  is  useless  to  pretend  foretelling  the  times  to  come.  They 
depend  on  too  many  circumstances  unknown  to  us.  We  must  keep 
faith  in  the  future,  and  never  be  weary  of  enlightening  and  exalting 
the  minds  of  our  fellows.  To-day  as  well  as  yesterday,  as  well  as 
to-morrow,  we  must  be  the  leaven  in  the  lump.  In  the  French  char- 
acter are  admirable  reserves  of  idealism.  It  cannot  find  its  defini- 
tive satisfaction  in  irreligion  and  atheism.  A  renovation  of  religious 
idealism  appears  already  in  the  most  gifted  of  the  nation.  I  do  not 
believe  either  that  France  can  ever  fall  a  victim  to  clericalism.  It 
has  suffered  too  much  from  it  in  the  past  to  bear  its  yoke  again. 

Let  us,  then,  go  on  forewarning  men  against  this  double  danger, — 
atheism  and  clericalism.  And  the  future  will  disclose  ways  and 
means  for  the  religious  associations  best  suited  to  the  spiritual 
need. 

At  the  conclusion  of  Professor  Reville's  address  the  Congress  ad- 
journed until  two  in  the  afternoon. 


98 


SECOND  GENERAL  SESSION   OF  THE  INTER- 
NATIONAL  CONGRESS. 

In  Tremont  Temple,  Tuesday  afternoon,  September  24,  2  o'clock. 
Rev.  Charles  E.  St.  John,  Secretary  of  the  American  Unitarian 
Association,  conducted  religious  services. 

President  Eliot. — One  of  the  Vice-Presidents  of  the  Council  has 
been  kind  enough  to  consent  to  relieve  me  of  the  duty  of  presiding 
this  afternoon,  and  I  am  very  glad  to  intrust  the  conduct  of  this 
meeting  to  the  just  and  genial  guidance  of  President  Hamilton, 
of  Tufts  College,  who  will  be  your  Chairman  for  this  session. 

Vice-President  F.  W.  Hamilton,  D.D. — It  is  a  very  pleasant 
duty  which  falls  to  me,  and  a  very  delightful  privilege,  I  am  sure, 
which  falls  to  you.  Those  of  us  who  are  interested  in  what  is  hap- 
pening in  the  world  cannot  have  failed  to  notice  one  of  the  distin- 
guishing features  of  the  great  war  between  Russia  and  Japan,  and 
that  was  the  highly  scientific  way  in  which  the  war  was  carried  on. 
And  you  will  remember  that,  in  place  of  the  dramatic  battlefield 
scenes  surrounding  the  headquarters  of  the  military  commanders  of 
old  days,  we  had  reported  to  us  scenes  which  were  more  like  the  in- 
terior of  a  business  office.  The  great  general  who  commanded  the 
immense  armies  of  Japan  in  the  heat  of  those  desperate  engage- 
ments sat  quietly  in  his  headquarters  miles  away  from  the  front, 
and  was  kept  instantly  in  touch  with  every  phase  of  the  swiftly 
changing  conflict  by  the  telephone  and  the  field  telegraph,  which 
were  nerves  connecting  his  brain  with  every  one  of  the  movements 
of  that  great  body.  We  are  privileged  to  sit  here  to-day  and  hear 
through  these  living  telephones  of  the  progress  of  the  great  struggle 
between  the  friends  of  liberty  in  religion  and  those  who  would 
shackle  the  religious  movements  of  the  human  mind.  As  I  look  over 
this  program,  I  cannot  but  feel  how  closely  we  are  united  in  these 


99 

days  with  our  brethren  from  across  the  seas,  and  how  great  our  privi- 
lege to  have  them  come  and  tell  us  directly  what  is  going  on  in  those 
parts  of  the  world  which  they  represent.  Without  further  preface 
I  take  great  pleasure  in  presenting  to  you  the  first  speaker  of  the  after- 
noon, Dr.  Martin  Rade,  professor  in  the  University  of  Marburg, 
in  Germany. 


IOO 


THE    RELIGIOUS  SITUATION    IN  GERMANY   AND 
THE  FRIENDS  OF  THE  CHRISTLICHE  WELT. 

BY    PROFESSOR    MARTIN    RADE,    D.D.,    OF    THE    UNIVERSITY 
OF    MARBURG. 

You  have  invited  me  to  speak  to  you  about  present  conditions  in 
the  German  Church  and  about  the  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt 
(Friends  of  the  Christian  World).  You  will  allow  me,  I  am 
sure,  to  tell  you  how  I  felt  about  the  matter  when  I  accepted  this 
invitation.  I  would  like  to  thank  you  by  using  the  greatest  frankness 
in  addressing  you. 

It  will  not  be  irrelevant  to  the  subject  in  hand  if  I  confess  to  you 
at  the  outset  that,  in  general,  I  am  no  friend  of  such  congresses  as 
this, — that  I  do  not  consider  the  time  ripe  for  this  sort  of  international 
association,  formed  to  discuss  questions  of  church  and  religion. 
Perhaps  in  America  and  in  Great  Britain  you  are  more  advanced 
and  better  prepared  than  we  in  Germany.  I  will  gladly  let  myself 
be  convinced  of  this  by  the  work  of  this  Congress.  I  would  like  to 
learn  from  you.  In  Germany  we  are  still  too  inclined  to  go  our 
own  way  in  matters  of  church  and  religion.  We  are  not  yet  in  posi- 
tion to  attempt  seriously  to  carry  on  practical  work  in  common 
with  Christians  of  other  nations.  I  believe  that  this  is  also  true  of 
Switzerland;  for  even  between  the  Protestants  of  Switzerland  and 
those  of  the  German  Empire  practical  association  is  only  in  its  begin- 
nings, finding  expression  principally  in  aid  of  foreign  missions. 
And  what  I  have  said  is  true  not  only  of  the  liberal,  but  also  of  the 
conservative  parties  in  German  Protestantism.  It  is  only  a  small 
part  of  the  so-called  "old  orthodox"  Germans  who  seek  international 
fellowship  and  who  keep  in  touch  with  sympathetic  circles  in  Great 
Britain  and  America.  The  Evangelical  Alliance  has  made  no 
progress  in  Germany  during  the  last  few  decades.  Even  the  Ge- 
meinschaftsbewegung,  a  lay  movement  strongly  influenced  by  Meth- 
odism, has  in  its  midst  a  current  which  seeks  to  escape  the  influence 
of  English  piety. 


IOI 


This  inability  of  German  Protestantism  to  ally  itself  with  Prot- 
estantism in  other  lands  is  simply  due  to  its  history.  This  history 
finds  tangible  expression,  first,  in  the  constitution  of  the  German 
churches. 

Since  1870  we  have  had  a  unified  German  Empire.  That  it  is 
a  confederation,  and  not  a  single  state,  is  no  hindrance  to  the  unity 
of  our  political  life,  any  more  than  the  political  vigor  and  power  of 
the  American  Union  are  hindered  by  the  fact  that  it  is  composed  of 
individual  states.  Domestic  politics,  the  regulation  of  local  matters, 
constitutes  the  jurisdiction,  as  may  be  easily  understood,  of  the  indi- 
vidual states.  To  their  rights  belongs  especially  that  of  the  admin- 
istration of  church  and  school.  The  German  Empire  consists  of 
twenty-six  single  states.  As  a  result,  simply  counting  the  number  of 
supervising  states,  there  are  twenty-six  different  church  bodies. 

Not  every  German  state,  however,  is  limited  to  one  established 
church.  The  kingdom  of  Prussia,  for  example,  includes,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  Prussian  Established  Church  (that  is,  the  Evangelical 
Church  of  the  old  provinces,  in  which  the  Union  is  in  force),  also 
the  established  churches  of  the  lands  annexed  in  1866,  which  remain 
independent  church  bodies.  These  are  the  churches  of  Hanover, 
Schleswig-Holstein,  Hesse  (the  Electorate),  Nassau,  and  Frankfort. 
Many  of  the  new  Prussian  provinces  have  also,  like  many  of  the  other 
German  states,  both  Lutheran  and  Reformed  (Calvinistic)  churches. 
So  there  are  fifty  more  or  less  independent  church  bodies  in  Germany, 
with  the  constitution  of  an  established  church.  Each  of  these  fifty 
established  churches  has  its  special  constitution  and  its  own  con- 
fessional position.  And  the  most  remarkable  feature  of  all  is  that 
though  all  of  these  churches  assert  themselves  to  be  either  Lutheran 
or  Reformed  or  profess  to  be  in  the  Union,  the  legal  authority  of  the 
confessions  which  have  come  down  from  the  past,  the  formulation 
and  significance  of  the  requirements  in  regard  to  teaching  on  the  part 
of  the  clergy,  and  other  matters  of  this  sort  are  by  no  means  uni- 
formly understood  either  within  the  Lutheran  or  the  Reformed  or 
the  Union  Church.  The  fact  is  that  every  one  of  these  churches, 
large  or  small,  has  its  own  special  history. 

So  it  comes  that  the  life  conditions  of  religious  freedom  in  these 


102 

churches  are  widely  different.  In  some  churches,  like  those  of  Baden 
and  of  Alsace-Lorraine,  liberal  thought  stands  upon  the  same  footing 
as  orthodox,  or  at  least  remains  absolutely  free  from  attack  in  its 
pastoral  activities.  On  the  other  hand,  in  other  churches  a  liberal 
tendency  is  barely  tolerated,  is  persecuted  or  completely  excluded 
by  law.  In  part  the  states  have  shown  a  desire  to  leave  the  regu- 
lation of  these  internal  and  local  affairs  to  the  churches  themselves 
by  giving  them  a  synodal  constitution.  (In  1873  was  issued  the 
Kirchengemeinde-  und  Synodalordnung  of  the  Prussian  State  Church. 
The  first  general  synod  was  held  in  Berlin  in  1875.)  ^n  every  case, 
however,  the  fact  that  the  particular  church  is  subject  to  its  par- 
ticular state  is  the  fundamental  and  legal  condition  which  gives  that 
church  its  right  of  existence.  Over  the  synods  are  the  church 
authorities,  appointed  by  the  state  government.  The  state  appoints 
the  instructors  and  professors  on  the  theological  faculties  of  our 
universities;  but  the  churches  do  not  give,  nor  have  they  the  right 
to  give,  a  position  as  pastor  to  any  one  who  has  not  completed  a 
theological  course  of  at  least  three  years  at  one  of  these  universities.* 

The  attempts  which  have  been  made  to  form  non-conformist 
church  bodies  are  not  important  enough  to  call  for  consideration 
over  against  the  established  church  system.  For  the  most  part 
they  are  the  result  of  obstinacy  in  regard  to  doctrine,  and  in  lack  of 
ability  to  conform  to  new  conditions  they  exceed  anything  within 
the  established  churches. 

Secondly,  to  understand  our  German  Protestantism  one  must 
study  the  Lutheran  Reformation.  To  be  sure,  a  broad  stream  of 
the  Reformed  (that  is,  Calvinistic)  type  of  religion  also  flowed  over 
Germany.     It  brought,  too,  strong  forces  with  it,  which  have  exerted 

*  Comp.  Mulert,  "Die  Lehrverpflichtung  in  der  evangelischen  Kirche  Deutschlands." 
Tubingen,  J.  C.  B.  Mohr,  1904.  Lober,  "Die  im  evangelischen  Deutschland  geltenden  Ordina- 
tionsverpflichtungen  geschichtlich  geordnet."  Leipsic,  Georg  Wigand,  1905.  The  most  recent 
survey  of  the  existing  church  bodies  in  Germany,  including  the  non-conformist  churches,  is  offered 
by  Schneider,  "Kirchliches  Jahrbuch  auf  das  Jahr  1007"  (34  years).  Gtttersloh,  C.  Bertelsmann. 
A  detailed  account  of  the  structure  of  a  German  Landeskirche  (Established  Church)  is  given 
in  the  three  volumes  of  the  series  "Evangelische  Kirchenkunde":  Vol.1.,  "Das  kirchliche  Leben 
der  Evangelisch-Lutherischen  Landeskirche  des  Konigreichs  Sachsen."  By  Professor  Drews  in 
Giessen.  Vol.  II.,  "Das  kirchliche  Leben  der  evangelischen  Kirche  der  Provinz  Schlesien." 
By  Lie.  Dr.  Martin  Schian.  Vol.  III.,  "Das  kirchliche  Leben  in  der  evangelische-protestan- 
tischen  Kirche  in  Grossherzogtum  Baden."  By  Rev.  A.  Ludwig.  Tubingen,  J.  C.  B.  Mohr, 
1002,  1903,  1907.  In  regard  to  the  church  constitutions  in  force  the  best  information  is  sup- 
plied by  the  comprehensive  work,  Friedberg,  "Die  geltenden  Verfassungsgesetze  der  deutschen 
Landeskirchen,  mit  Nachtragen."    Tubingen,  J.  C.  B.  Mohr,  1885.    2  vols. 


103 

great  influence  on  the  present  organization  of  the  churches  and  upon 
theological  thought.  The  Brandenburg  Prussian  rulers  have  allied 
themselves  with  the  Reformed  Church  since  1613.  Schleiermacher, 
the  greatest  German  theologian  of  the  nineteenth  century,  belonged 
also  to  the  Reformed  Church.  Nevertheless,  the  heart-beat  of  the 
Protestants  of  Germany  is  Lutheran.  Luther's  religious  nature  and 
faith  have  determined  the  German  type  of  religion,  penetrating 
far  into  reformed  circles,  and  even  exerting  an  influence  upon  Ger- 
man Catholics.  The  hymns  of  Paul  Gerhardt,  the  strict  Lutheran, 
are  treasured  and  sung  by  the  Catholics.  Luther's  faith  carried  the 
German  people  safely  through  the  miseries  of  the  Thirty  Years' 
War.  The  story  of  Luther's  life,  his  words  at  the  Diet  of  Worms, 
his  translation  of  the  Bible,  still  nourish  all  those  in  Germany  to-day 
who  live  a  religious  life.  Therefore,  he  must  study  Luther  who 
wishes  to  know  the  religion  of  the  Germans.* 

This  Luther,  however,  was  at  all  times  a  good  Trinitarian.  All 
rationalism,  intellectualism,  scepticism,  was  foreign  to  him.  In 
religious  matters  his  was  a  thoroughly  conservative  nature.  Yet 
this  same  Luther  discovered  the  freedom  of  the  conscience,  the  free- 
dom of  personal  conviction  from  every  human  authority.  "God 
wants  no  one  to  serve  him  under  compulsion!"  he  cried.  "I  say 
it  again,  God  wants  no  one  to  serve  him  under  compulsion!  I  say 
it  for  the  third  time,  I  say  it  a  hundred  thousand  times,  God  wants 
no  one  to  serve  him  under  compulsion!"  f 

This  religious  "liberalism"  of  Luther's  led  to  the  break  with  that 
Roman  creation,  the  One  Holy  and  Catholic  Church,  with  the 
tyranny  of  its  canon  law,  and  of  its  visible  head  the  pope.  Both 
features  of  Luther's  piety,  his  conservatism,  with  its  faithful  allegiance 
to  that  which  came  down  from  the  ancient  past,  and  his  liberalism, 
with  its  rejection  of  every  tyranny  in  matters  of  personal  faith,  still 
constitute  to-day  the  religion  of  our  Protestant  people. 

Especially  does  Protestant  Germany  maintain  the  opposition  to 
Rome  as  it  would  cherish  a  sacred  inheritance.     On  no  point  are  we 

*  Comp.  "Doctor  Martin  Luthers  Leben,  Taten  und  Meinungen  auf  Grund  reichlicher 
Mitteilungen  aus  seinen  Briefen  und  Schriften  erzahlt."  By  Martin  Rade.  Tubingen,  J.  C.  B. 
Mohr.  3  vols.  This  much-read  book  is  in  favor  with  educated  readers  as  well  as  the  common 
people. 

t"Ein  Geschicht,  wie  Gott  einer  ehrbarn  Kloster-Jungfrauen  ausgeholfen  hat."  1524. 
Weimar  edition,  xv.  p.  87. 


io4 

German  Protestants  more  united.  And  it  is  significant  that  the  first 
step  toward  a  unification  of  the  established  churches  on  a  church  basis, 
which  was  made  recently  by  the  formation  of  a  German  Evangelical 
Church  Commission,  has  done  its  best  work,  so  far,  in  behalf  of 
Protestants  living  in  Roman  Catholic  districts  and  in  the  campaign 
against  the  Jesuits.  A  comprehensive  survey  of  the  different  parties 
in  all  the  established  churches  reveals,  too,  that  the  single  point  upon 
which  they  are  absolutely  united  is  their  antipathy  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  Yes,  even  further,  the  unchurched  elements  in 
Protestant  Germany  are  set  in  motion  as  soon  as  the  cry  is  raised 
against  Rome.     That  was  shown  again  in  the  last  Reichstag  election. 

In  reality,  one  cannot  say  that  the  Protestant  Church  and  modern 
progress  are  now  endangered  by  Rome.  All  which  must  be  done 
in  districts  where  the  two  confessions  exist  side  by  side,  as  a  pro- 
tection against  the  natural  dangers  attendant  upon  the  constant 
migration  from  east  to  west  and  from  the  country  to  the  city,  which 
has  been  legalized  since  the  beginning  of  the  last  century,  and  against 
the  dangers  attendant  upon  church  propaganda,  is  accomplished 
by  two  splendid  organizations, — the  Gustave  Adolph  Society  (at 
work  since  1832)  and  the  Evangelical  Federation  (at  work 
since  1886).  Above  all,  at  the  present  moment  in  our  national 
politics,  the  predominance  of  the  Catholic  party,  the  Centre,  which 
has  depressed  the  domestic  situation  for  a  number  of  years,  has  been 
brought  to  an  end  in  the  Reichstag,  and  thereby  throughout  the  whole 
German  Empire.  There  is  naturally  no  reliance  to  be  placed  upon 
this  political  combination,  but  the  imperial  government  is  now  reso- 
lute in  its  determination  to  govern  without  the  Centre.  Of  all 
the  German  states,  only  Bavaria  and  Alsace-Lorraine  remain  more 
or  less  completely  under  the  parliamentary  domination  of  the  Centre. 
In  these  two,  only,  does  the  Protestant  Church  occasionally  feel  itself 
to  be  laboring  under  difficulties  as  a  confession.  There  is  an  insuffi- 
ciency of  money  and  of  constitutional  freedom  of  action,  but  these  are 
misfortunes  which  come  almost  necessarily  to  a  Protestant  estab- 
lished church  in  a  state  inhabited  for  the  most  part  by  Catholics. 

But  is  there  no  tendency  in  the  Protestant  churches  to  seek  out  the 
common  Christian  element  in  Catholicism,  and  to  foster  it?  To 
this  we  answer  that  everything  which  has  been  done  in  this  regard, 
as  the  work  of  an  organization  or  in  accordance  with  the  principles 


io5 

of  some  society,  was  either  done  from  suspicious  motives  or  was 
premature.  To  bring  about  a  more  sympathetic  understanding  of 
the  Catholic  type  of  religion,  however,  is  an  end  that  the  Christliche 
Welt,  which  I  represent,  continually  has  in  view,  without  thereby 
relinquishing  in  the  slightest  its  Protestant  standpoint  * 

II. 

The  religious  situation  in  Germany  would,  indeed,  be  most 
favorable  for  Protestantism,  were  it  not  for  the  internal  difficulties. 

To  be  sure,  throughout  the  established  churches  the  governing 
authorities  give  conscientious  attention  to  providing  a  good  admin- 
istration. Churches  are  built  and  new  congregations  formed,  the 
clergy  are  well  provided  for,  synods  are  called  to  give  counsel  on 
the  affairs  of  a  district,  of  a  province,  or  of  a  whole  state,  as  the 
case  may  be.  Christian  societies  of  every  kind  foster  works  of 
charity,  care  for  the  protection  of  the  young,  and  provide  represen- 
tative literature.  Most  of  these  societies  are  entirely  independent, 
some  receive  support  from  the  churches  and  their  authorities.  Theo- 
logical faculties  with  scholarly  and  spiritually-minded  professors 
provide  for  the  education  of  the  ministry.  The  attendance  at  the 
churches  varies  greatly,  but  in  many  localities,  in  the  cities  as  well 
as  in  the  country,  it  is  good.  It  cannot  be  said  that  the  people  in 
general  have  fallen  away  from  the  Church.  To  be  sure  the  Social 
Democrats,  who  on  January  25  of  this  year  again  cast  over  three 
million  votes  for  their  candidates  in  the  Reichstag  election,  are  hostile 
to  the  Church.  But  not  all  Social  Democrats  are  hostile  to  religion, 
and  some  of  them  even  maintain  their  allegiance  to  the  Church. 
The  agitation  for  a  general  repudiation  of  membership  in  the  estab- 
lished churches,which  has  recently  been  revived  from  various  motives, 
has  not  yet  carried  any  considerable  number  with  it.  Since  1875 
the  so-called  Civilstandsgesetz  has  been  in  force  in  the  German 
Empire.  By  this  law  German  citizens  were  freed  from  the  necessity 
of  having  their  marriages  performed  by  the  Church  and  of  having 
their  children  baptized.     Still  from  1900  to  1904,  of  the  children  born 

*  Even  the  Kreuzzeitung,  and  that  branch  of  the  (politically)  Conservative  Party  whose 
▼iews  it  represents,  no  longer  keep  in  touch  with  the  Roman  Catholics  as  they  did  forty  or 
fifty  years  ago,  although  the  old  tradition  exerts  still  some  influence  in  these  circles.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  duty  to  understand  and  respect  Catholicism  is  rightly  felt  in  these  circles  to  be  as 
important  as  the  Christliche  Welt  holds  it  to  be. 


io6 

within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Prussian  State  Church,  only  4.12  per 
cent,  remained  unbaptized;  in  1901,  5.18  per  cent.;  in  1902,  4.87 
per  cent.;  in  1903,  3.30  per  cent.;  in  1904,  4.7  per  cent.  It  must 
be  remembered  that  many  of  these  children  could  not  be  presented 
for  baptism,  as  death  occurred  shortly  after  birth.  The  wilful 
rejection  of  baptism  is  principally  in  the  large  cities  and  their  envi- 
rons. In  the  country  the  custom  of  infant  baptism  prevails  almost 
undisturbed.  In  addition  to  Prussia,  only  Saxony  and  a  few  of  the 
very  small  states  have  over  3  per  cent,  unbaptized  children.  Still 
rarer,  indeed  almost  unheard  of,  is  the  refusal  of  Protestant  parents 
to  present  their  children  for  confirmation,  as  is  usual  in  Germany 
when  a  boy  or  girl  reaches  fourteen  years  of  age.  On  the  other  hand, 
marriage  by  a  clergyman  is  not  so  regularly  sought.  In  the  Prussian 
State  Church  in  1903,  of  the  marriages  in  which  both  contracting 
parties  were  Protestants,  91.85  per  cent,  were  performed  by  a  clergy- 
man; in  1904,  91.05  per  cent.;  of  the  mixed  marriages,  in  1903, 
89.20  per  cent.;  in  1904,  91.69  per  cent.  The  attendance  at  com- 
munion also  differs  very  much  in  different  regions.  In  the  Protes- 
tant Church  of  Bavaria,  in  1904,  67.29  per  cent,  communicated;  in 
the  church  of  Hamburg,  only  9.47  per  cent. 

Externally  the  situation  is  such  that  the  German  established 
churches  could  carry  on  the  battle  against  the  weakness  of  human 
nature  and  against  the  dangers  of  modern  culture  with  good  confi- 
dence if  they  were  filled  with  the  spirit  of  healthy  progress  and  of 
genuine  Christian  fellowship. 

To  be  sure,  strife  about  opinions  within  the  churches  would  in 
itself  be  no  fault.  "Strife  is  the  father  of  all  things."  There  is 
nothing  healthier  or  that  gives  a  better  temper  to  our  steel  than  the 
battle  for  the  truth.  But,  in  the  church  which  is  to  receive  a  blessing 
from  such  a  strife,  conditions  must  prevail  which  make  it  possible 
for  the  strife  to  run  the  right  course.  It  must  be  actually  possible 
to  carry  on  with  openness  and  in  the  spirit  of  brotherhood  an 
exchange  of  opinion  in  which  only  the  subject  in  hand  is  at  issue, 
and  in  which  that  side  prevails  which  is  intellectually  and  spir- 
itually the  stronger.  In  our  churches,  however,  established  legal 
rights  hinder  freedom  of  thought. 

This  situation  is  brought  to  consciousness  by  the  chronic  appear- 
ance of  the  so-called  "cases."     Just  as  you  in  America  have  your 


107 

"Briggs,"  "Smith,"  and  "Crapsey"  cases,  so  we  in  Germany  have 
our  "Fischer  Case,"  "Romer  Case,"  "Ce*sar  Case,"  and  others. 
With  us,  as  here  in  America,  the  point  at  issue  is  formally  that  of  the 
recognition  of  particular  dogmas,  as  the  birth  of  Jesus  without  a 
human  father,  his  bodily  resurrection,  etc.  But  these  cases  with  us 
arise  under  other  conditions  and  run  a  different  course. 

Externally,  they  take  the  form  of  legal  proceedings  between  a 
pastor  holding  a  position  in  an  established  church  or  desirous  of 
holding  one,  and  the  governing  authorities  of  that  church.  The 
pastor  is  found  by  the  authorities  to  be  in  error  in  regard  to  doctrine, 
and  is  therefore  either  excluded  from  the  ministry  or  permitted  to 
officiate  after  remonstrance  and  warning.  In  all  such  cases  the 
different  parties  take  an  active  part,  especially  through  their  periodi- 
cals, but  also  through  open  meetings  and  resolutions  and  through 
debates  and  motions  in  the  synods.  The  political  press,  too,  takes 
part  in  such  cases,  and  occasionally  even  in  the  legislatures  the  echoes 
of  the  strife  are  heard. 

At  the  bottom  of  all  these  cases  lies  the  antithesis  between  the 
conservative  character  of  the  church  membership  and  the  modern, 
advanced  character  of  present-day  theology,  or,  stated  with  reference 
to  the  persons  actually  concerned,  the  antithesis  between  the  church 
authorities  and  the  theological  faculties.  To  be  sure,  there  are  some 
few  among  the  church  authorities  who  are  liberal  at  heart,  and  there 
are  also  faculties  which  are  very  conservative.  But  liberal  church 
officials  are  continually  put  under  constraint  by  the  conservative  ele- 
ment which  rules  in  the  larger  churches,  and  by  the  logic  of  the 
position  they  occupy,  to  carry  on  their  administration  conservatively. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  conservative  faculties  are  continually  con- 
strained by  the  modern  atmosphere  in  which  they  live  in  the  univer- 
sities, and  by  the  inner  logic  of  scholarly  work,  to  make  concessions 
to  the  spirit  of  freedom.  At  the  present  day,  among  these  "  positive  " 
or  "old  orthodox"  professors  a  not  inconsiderable  number  have 
confessed  to  the  necessity  of  a  modern  theology.  They  would  like 
to  deprive  the  liberal  theologians  of  the  predicate  "modern,"  in  order 
to  name  themselves  "modern  positivists."  None  of  our  conservative 
professors  still  holds  to  the  old  dogma  of  verbal  inspiration.  It  is 
now  only  in  certain  lay  circles,  as  those,  for  instance,  which  group 
themselves  together  in  the  Gemeinschajlsbewegung  (Christian  Fellow- 


io8 

ship  Movement)  that  the  literal  inspiration  of  the  sacred  Book  is 
still  strictly  held.  In  short,  in  all  the  "  Cases "  which  we  have  had 
we  see  plainly  the  strained  relations  and  the  incompatibility  which 
exist  between  orthodoxy,  on  the  one  hand,  intrenched  in  the  es- 
tablished churches  by  right  of  law  and  long  usage,  and  the  advanced 
scholarship  of  the  theological  faculties  on  the  other.  These  faculties 
educate  pastors  for  the  churches;  but  the  churches  (that  is,  the  au- 
thorities who  carry  on  their  administration  under  the  old  Canon  Laws) 
do  not  want  such  pastors  as  these  faculties  train.  The  congregations 
differ  in  different  provinces  and  regions.  A  large  proportion  of  the 
laity  are  strictly  orthodox;  but  in  the  cities  especially,  there  are  large 
groups  who  are  indignant  at  the  legalistic  attitude  of  the  church 
authorities,  and  who  regard  it  as  a  serious  wrong  when  these  officials 
stand  in  the  way  of  their  having  liberal  pastors.  The  two  powers 
which  carry  on  the  conflict  are  really  the  church  authorities  and  the 
faculties,  but  the  victims  of  the  war  are  always  in  the  first  instance 
the  clergy  and  candidates  for  the  ministry,  and  in  the  second  the 
congregations. 

This  struggle,  carried  on  unceasingly,  robs  many  capable  and 
religiously-minded  young  men  of  the  joy  of  the  ministry.  To  be 
sure,  in  this  war  as  in  others,  there  are  truces  and  compromises. 
When  a  "  case "  does  occur,  it  is  not  usual  for  it  to  be  settled  deci- 
sively. The  governing  authorities  of  the  largest  German  established 
church,  the  Prussian,  are  experienced  and  wise  enough  to  find  con- 
tinually new  ways  out  of  the  difficulty.  They  either  sacrifice  the 
man  and  give  a  liberal  decision  about  the  point  at  issue,  as  in  the 
Ce'sar  Case,  or  else  they  spare  the  man,  and  give  a  rigorously  con- 
servative decision  about  the  point  at  issue,  as  in  the  Fischer  Case. 
Such  decisions  do  not  usually  satisfy  any  one;  but  it  must  be  admitted 
that,  temporum  ratione  habita,  no  other  course  lies  open  to  wise  and 
considerate  officials.  On  that  account  even  these  public  "cases" 
are  by  no  means  the  worst  we  have  to  experience.  Still  more  deplor- 
able is  the  quiet  and  secret  activity  of  the  minor  church  authorities, 
who,  because  of  the  theology  which  young  theologians  desiring  to 
enter  the  ministry  bring  with  them  from  the  universities,  act  towards 
them  as  if,  with  such  opinions,  they  could  not  possibly  obtain  a 
pastorate  and  crush  their  budding  convictions.  The  examinations, 
which  are  held  for  the  most  part  by  these  church  authorities,  afford 


109 

an  opportunity  for  this,  and  so  do  the  official  visitations  which  are 
made  from  time  to  time  on  every  pastor.  Lectures  and  other  public 
utterances  of  the  clergy  also  give  an  opportunity  for  attack,  and 
an  especially  favorable  one  is  that  afforded  by  the  application  of 
a  pastor  for  a  new  office.  When  this  happens,  factional,  conser- 
vative members  of  the  congregation  come  to  the  rescue  by  regular 
petition  or  even  anonymous  denunciation. 

III. 

Under  these  circumstances,  in  spite  of  the  splendid  condition  of 
theological  scholarship  in  our  Universities,  the  situation  for  religious 
liberalism  in  our  churches  is  not  an  easy  one.  For  its  own  protection, 
therefore,  this  religious  liberalism  has  also  organized  itself  according 
to  the  party  plan.  This  was  done  first  in  an  organization  in  exist- 
ence since  1863,  which  is  also  represented  at  this  honored  Congress, 
the  Deutsche  Protestanten  Verein  (German  Protestant  Association). 
Theoretically,  this  organization  includes  all  of  Germany.  Actually, 
however,  it  has  taken  root  only  in  Berlin,  Brandenburg,  Hamburg, 
Bremen,  Thuringia,  Baden,  Nassau,  and  the  Bavarian  Palatinate. 
After  a  serious  retrograde  period  this  organization  has  within  the  last 
few  years  made  visible  progress,  both  outwardly  and  inwardly.  Its 
organs  are  the  Protestanlenblatt  and  the  Protestantische  Monatshefte. 
Another  liberal  movement  in  Prussia  which  must  be  mentioned  here 
is  the  so-called  "Middle  Party,"  or  Evangelische  Vereinigung. 
Periodicals  which  represent  it  are  the  Preussische  Kirchenzeitung,  a 
weekly,  and  the  Deulsch-evangelische  Blatter,  a  monthly.  The 
difference  between  these  two  parties  is  this:  The  Middle  Party  ex- 
pects an  improvement  in  church  conditions  to  come  from  an  intelli- 
gent attitude  on  the  part  of  the  church  governing  authorities  and 
other  officers,  the  superintendents,  and  all  the  clergy.  They  take 
their  stand  on  the  ground  of  the  present  synodal  constitution,  and 
hope  by  means  of  it  to  attain  greater  freedom,  although  the  Middle 
Party,  even  with  the  support  of  the  Left, — that  is,  the  liberals, — has 
nowhere  in  the  Prussian  synods  more  than  a  minority.  The  Pro- 
testanten Verein  seeks  to  create  an  inclusive  organization  of  laymen, 
which  by  voting  together,  first  in  the  congregational  elections  and 
then  in  the  synodal  elections,  will  effect  a  change  in  the  numerical 


no 

strength  of  the  parties  in  the  synods  in  favor  of  the  liberals.  By 
these  means  they  hope  to  obtain  a  more  liberal  constitution  for  the 
whole  church.  This  road  is  a  long  and  difficult  one.  For,  while 
it  is  true  that  in  certain  large  cities  an  active  and  open  agitation  can 
secure  liberal  majorities  in  the  congregational  organizations,  in  the 
country  districts  there  is  very  little  prospect  that  this  will  be  achieved. 
Indeed,  it  cannot  be  foreseen  when  the  results  of  this  method  will  be 
traceable  in  the  provincial  and  general  synods.  So  the  awakening 
of  the  masses  in  the  cities  out  of  their  indifference  to  the  conditions  in 
the  churches  is  really  the  work  which  lies  closest  at  hand;  and  this 
the  Protestanten  Verein  is  actually  doing, — with  what  success  must 
be  learned  from  the  future.  A  very  active  movement  has  recently 
appeared  in  the  arena, — to  be  sure,  only  in  the  Rhine  districts  and 
Westphalia,  but  there  with  great  success, — Freunde  der  evangel- 
ischen  Freiheit.  These  western  provinces  of  Prussia  have  been  for 
many  years  the  seat  of  an  active  life  in  church  and  religious  matters. 
Under  the  impression  made  by  the  "cases"  which  have  occurred  in 
these  districts,  the  lay  elements,  under  the  leadership  of  pastors  of  the 
right  temperament,  have  become  very  active,  and  have  banded  them- 
selves together.  Their  organ  is  the  Evangelisches  Gemeindeblatt  filr 
Rheinland  und  Westphalen.  Another  representative  monthly  period- 
ical of  the  same  character,  published  by  Professor  Baumgarten,  under 
the  name  Evangelische  Freiheit,  should  also  be  mentioned  in  this 
connection. 

But  nothing  has  been  said  yet  of  the  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt 
(Friends  of  the  Christian  World). 

First,  let  us  remember  that  there  was  a  Christliche  Welt  long  before 
there  were  Friends  of  the  Christliche  Welt.  The  Christliche  Welt  is 
a  weekly  periodical,  which  has  been  published  since  1887.  (In  the 
first  year  it  appeared  under  the  name  Evangelisch-Lutherisches 
Gemeindeblatt.)  Of  all  the  periodicals  of  the  same  character  in 
Germany  it  has  reached  by  far  the  largest  circulation. 

Since  1892  leading  spirits  among  the  contributors  and  friends  of 
this  journal  have  met  together  every  year  to  discuss  questions  of 
common  interest.  The  theological  faculties  have  been  especially 
well  represented  at  these  meetings  by  the  presence  of  many  of  their 
members.  The  proceedings  have  taken  the  form  of  discussions 
about  the  latest  questions  at  issue  in  theology.     Gradually  arose 


Ill 

also  an  interest  in  church  politics  and  in  practical  work.  The  pre- 
carious situation  of  the  pastors  educated  by  our  professors  was  the 
chief  reason  which  finally  led  to  the  organization  in  1903  of  the  society 
called  the  Vereinigung  der  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt.  It  num- 
bers now  only  twelve  hundred  members.  These  are  scattered  over 
all  Germany,  Switzerland,  and  Austria.  Indeed,  it  includes  also 
single  members  not  of  the  German  tongue.  The  Association  is  not 
strong  in  the  forces  which  lead  to  political  activity,  organization,  and 
agitation.  The  interest  of  the  members  returns  continually  to  inner 
-questions  and  to  unifying  work  within  their  own  circle.  Indeed, 
this  is  no  small  task, — to  overcome  more  and  more,  at  least  for  the 
members  of  this  Association,  the  isolation  of  the  different  established 
churches  which  was  described  at  the  beginning  of  this  address. 
More  important  than  this  Association  is  the  Christliche  Welt  itself 
and  its  unenrolled  following  of  like-minded  friends  and  readers. 
Characteristic  of  the  paper,  as  well  as  of  its  friends,  is  a  disposition 
at  root  conservative,  yet  at  the  same  time  most  thorough-going  in 
its  liberalism.  We  are  conservative  in  that  we  hold  resolutely  to 
our  churches  and  to  their  history.  We  know  that  we  can  only  pay 
our  debts  to  the  present  and  the  future  by  guarding  the  religious  in- 
heritance we  have  received  from  our  fathers.  The  men  who  founded 
the  Christliche  Welt  and  who  brought  it  up  to  its  present  position, 
came,  for  the  most  part,  from  Lutheran  homes  of  strong  denomina- 
tional feeling,  where  they  had  breathed  in  deeply  the  air  of  pious 
tradition.  As  theologians  most  of  them  were  students  of  Albrecht 
Ritschl  (d.  1889),  professor  in  Gottingen,  who  was  a  man  with  a 
most  developed  feeling  for  the  Church  and  its  history.  But  we  are 
liberal  as  well  as  conservative.  We  stand,  before  everything  else, 
for  the  unconditional  freedom  of  theological  scholarship,  and  espe- 
cially that  of  historical  criticism.  We  know  very  well  that  no  church 
and  no  religion  can  live  on  criticism  and  the  negations  which  in- 
evitably go  with  it.  But  we  know  also  that  the  search  for  the  truth 
must  be  completely  unrestricted  if  it  is  to  have  any  meaning  at  all, 
that  the  truth  is  a  fact  which  reveals  itself,  and  of  itself  compels 
recognition,  while  much  in  accepted  tradition  becomes  untenable 
on  careful  examination.  Whenever,  therefore,  a  church  or  state 
government  shows  a  desire  to  lay  hand  upon  the  freedom  of  the 
theological  faculties  we  will   always  be  there  to  defend   it  to  the 


112 

very  last.  In  this  we  could  only  presuppose  that  no  one  would 
desire  the  office  of  a  professor  of  theology  who  did  not  person- 
ally, for  all  his  freedom  of  investigation  and  opinion,  feel  him- 
self to  belong  to  his  beloved  church.  Should  this  in  some  indi- 
vidual cases  prove  to  be  a  mistaken  assumption,  we  should  be  deal- 
ing with  hypocrisy,  with  an  anomaly  from  which  no  law  and  no 
policy  could  protect  us.  That  this  position  of  the  Christliche  Welt 
corresponds  to  that  of  the  theological  professors  themselves  is  without 
question.  Indeed,  it  can  be  said  that  fully  half  of  the  theologians 
holding  Protestant  professorships  in  Germany — that  is,  the  whole 
company  of  liberally  inclined  theological  instructors,  with  few  excep- 
tions— belong  to  the  Freunde  der  Christlichen  Welt. 

We  extend,  moreover,  our  demand  for  personal  freedom  to  include 
the  clergy.  It  must  suffice  here,  too,  if  a  clergyman  personally  and 
actually  feels  that  he  belongs  to  the  church  which  he  desires  to  serve. 
If  he  bears  witness  to  this  by  word  and  deed  he  should  be  allowed 
to  proclaim  the  gospel  and  perform  the  duties  of  his  office  according 
to  his  own  best  knowledge  and  conscience.  It  is  certain  that  we  can 
look  into  no  one's  heart.  Here,  too,  there  is  no  protection  against 
hypocrisy.  The  protection  of  the  law  is  directed  only  against  gross 
scandal;  but  this  can  never  be  occasioned  by  theological  views,  no 
matter  how  modern,  when  an  express  desire  to  belong  to  our  church 
is  present.  It  is  scarcely  possible  to  think  more  liberally  about  the 
relationship  of  theology  and  the  Church  than  this;  for,  if  one  were  to 
go  a  step  further,  and  characterize  this  desire  to  belong  to  the  Church 
as  also  an  unnecessary  element,  one  would  thereby  do  away  with 
the  Church  itself.  On  the  part  of  our  laity,  to  be  sure,  such  a  desire 
has  never  been  manifested  from  any  quarter, — at  least  not  in  the 
form  of  an  express  declaration  of  intention.  This  is  to  be  explained 
by  the  character  of  our  established  churches.  They  are  churches  of 
the  people,  which  one  joins  by  birth  and  from  which  one  is  separated, 
as  a  rule,  only  by  death. 

Again,  if  the  question  of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State  should 
arise  in  Germany  also,  there  is  nothing  in  our  principles  which  would 
hinder  us  from  agreeing  to  the  separation.  But  the  necessary  condi- 
tions for  such  an  act  do  not  at  present  prevail.  Neither  is  there  any 
necessity  laid  upon  us  to  work  for  separation  in  order  to  secure  relig- 
ious freedom.     For,  no  matter  how  partial  the  State  may  be  at  times 


1*3 

in  using  its  influence  in  the  Church  to  assist  reactionary  elements, 
still  officially  it  is  constantly  giving  proof  of  its  purpose  not  to  intrude 
in  matters  which  concern  the  Church  alone,  but  to  grant  freedom 
to  live  and  grow  to  all  parties  in  the  Church  without  distinction. 

It  is  possible,  therefore,  for  us  to  fight  the  battle  for  the  emanci- 
pation of  a  liberal  theology  and  religion  through  to  the  end  on  the 
battle-ground  of  the  old  established  Churches, — that  is,  on  ground 
where  the  old  Canon  Laws  are  still  in  force :  the  Freunde  der  Christ- 
lichen  Welt,  under  the  force  of  existing  conditions,  gladly  stand  in 
this  struggle  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  the  other  liberal  parties. 
They  would  much  rather  be  engaged  in  constructive  work,  but  they 
do  not  refuse  to  take  up  arms.* 

*  A  single  sentence  from  the  constitution  of  the  Association  is  all  that  I  need  quote: — 
Section  i.    The  "Association  of  the  Friends  of  the  Christian  World"  has,  as  its  purpose, 
the  mutual  furtherance  of  its  members'  interests  in  matters  of  church  and  religion. 

A  detailed  and  complete  statement  of  our  plans  and  purposes  does  not  exist.  On  Sept.  28, 
1904.  however,  the  following  theses  were  agreed  upon: — 

A.  1.  We  stand  for  the  absolute  freedom  of  theological  scholarship,  and  the  right  to  an- 
nounce the  results  of  its  investigation  openly,  as  an  indispensable  condition  for  the  healthy 
development  of  the  Protestant  religion  among  our  people. 

2.  We  demand  for  the  pastors  and  teachers  preparing  for  their  office  freedom  to  form  their 
own  convictions,  and  for  those  in  office  protection  against  a  narrow-minded  interpretation  and 
application  of  the  regulations  in  regard  to  religious  instruction,  and  against  an  arbitrary  cen- 
sorship over  the  exercise  of  their  civil  rights,  in  order  thereby  to  secure  a  foundation  for  the 
necessary  confidence  of  the  congregations  in  the  ministrations  of  their  pastors  and  teachers. 

3.  With  full  recognition  of  the  necessity  of  external  ecclesiastical  order,  we  oppose  the  desire 
to  give  uniformity  to  congregational  church  life,  and  especially  to  the  ordering  of  divine  service, 
in  accordance  with  fixed  rules,  as  the  varied  character  of  the  forms  can  only  further  a  richer 
development  of  life. 

4.  We  regard  as  an  urgent  task  the  necessity  of  satisfying  honestly  the  need  which  has  arisen 
among  all  classes  for  clearness  and  depth  in  religious  conceptions,  for  by  this  means  alone  can 
the  alienation  of  great  numbers  from  Protestant  Christianity  be  prevented. 

B.  The  General  Assembly  desires  of  the  members  of  the  Association: — 

1.  That  they  be  active  and  zealous  in  arranging  lectures  and  courses  of  lectures  on  religious 
and  church  topics,  with  discussions,  for  the  purpose  of  winning  laymen  of  all  classes  for  the  gospel; 
and  that  they  foster  this  as  a  most  important  task  of  the  local  association  to  which  they  belong. 

2.  That  they  give  their  assistance  in  the  collection  of  funds  for  relief  in  cases  of  special  need. 

3.  That  in  their  synodal  activity,  without  impairing  their  individual  allegiance  to  the  different 
groups  and  parties  within  the  established  churches,  they  work  especially  to  secure  the  following 
reforms: — 

a.  Revision  of  the  ordination  vows  and  confessional  requirements. 

b.  Limitation  of  the  right  to  discipline  on  account  of  teaching  to  cases  of  notorious  offence. 

c.  Transference  of  jurisdiction  over  the  clergy  to  a  separate  court,  independent  and  compe- 
tent in  such  cases. 

d.  Greater  freedom  in  matters  of  liturgy. 

e.  Protection  for  the  congregations,  the  clergy,  and  teachers  against  an  arbitrary  extension 
of  the  powers  and  privileges  of  church  authorities  and  synods. 

/.  Defence  against  the  subjugation  of  minorities. 

In  regard  to  B  1,  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  informal  meetings  of  clergy  and  laity — not  only 


ii4 


IV. 

What  help  do  we  expect  from  you,  the  religious  liberals  of  America 
and  Great  Britain,  in  this  battle  for  freedom?  I  remarked  at  the 
beginning  of  this  address  that  I  do  not  consider  the  time  has  come 
yet  for  international  associations.  The  battle  for  right,  for  the  right 
of  existence,  each  of  us  must  carry  on  in  his  own  land.  At  least  we 
in  Germany  must  do  so;  and  we  are  able  to.  If  you  are  seeking  some 
special  work  outside  your  own  lands,  send  your  help  to  the  little 
groups  of  genuine  Protestants  in  the  Slavic,  Roman,  and  Eastern 
lands.  Thereby  you  can  do  great  service  in  the  cause  of  freedom  of 
belief  and  conscience.  I  would  remind  you  especially  of  the 
difficult  situation  of  the  Protestants  in  Austria.  Between  us,  however, 
between  the  religious  liberals  of  the  English  and  of  the  German 
tongues,  there  seems  to  me  to  be  nothing  necessary  but  a  more  active 
interchange  of  theological  thought,  a  more  exact  knowledge  of  the 
very  different  conditions  which  prevail,  and  a  better  understanding 
of  the  nature  of  each  other's  religion.  If  this  is  accomplished,  then 
the  result  will  surely  be  that  each  will  have  from  the  other  some  new 
gain  for  the  inner  life.  And  thereby,  too,  our  right  of  existence  and 
the  propagation  of  a  truly  religious  Liberalism  will  have  been 
furthered  in  the  best  possible  manner. 

I  sincerely  hope  that  this  International  Congress  will  be  a  mighty 
weapon  and  a  blessed  instrument  in  bringing  about  this  end,  and  I 
should  be  happy  if  my  report  should  prove  to  be  helpful  to  the  high 
purposes  which  animate  it. 

The  Chairman. — I  am  going  to  take  the  liberty,  which  I  suppose 
the  Chairman  has,  of  departing  a  little  from  the  printed  order,  and 
calling  next  upon  Mr.  Theodore  Berg,  of  Copenhagen,  who  comes 
to  tell  us  about  the  outlook  in  Denmark  and  Norway. 

the  members  of  the  Association — for  the  discussion  of  religious  questions  is,  in  many  cities,  a  special 
work  of  our  society.  The  attendance  of  women  at  these  meetings  is  large.  Work  with  the  young 
also  takes  the  interest  of  many. 

Finally,  mention  of  the  fact  should  not  be  omitted,  that  the  Evangelisch-soziale  Kongress, 
a  respected  and  growing  organization,  of  which  Professor  Harnack  is  now  president,  has  for  a 
number  of  years  been  promoted  and  supported  for  the  most  part  by  Freunden  der  Christlichen 
Well. 


"5 


THE   LIBERAL  RELIGIOUS   MOVEMENT  IN 
NORWAY  AND  DENMARK. 

READ    BY  THEO.   BERG,   COPENHAGEN. 

My  Danish  brethren  have  enjoined  me  to  bring  you  their  loving 
brotherly  greeting  and  heartfelt  thanks  for  all  you  have  been  and  are 
to  us.  I  have  been  asked  to  tell  you  something  about  the  liberal 
religious  movement  in  our  country,  and  its  neighbor  and  near  and 
dear  relative,  Norway,  which  country,  unfortunately,  is  not  repre- 
sented at  this  Congress.  I  shall,  as  we  say,  "use  the  broad  brush," 
trying  to  give  you  a  general  impression  of  the  situation,  avoiding 
details,  which,  worked  at  haphazard  into  a  sketch  like  this,  tend  to 
misconceptions. 

I  am  sorry  that  Mr.  Haugerud,  the  Unitarian  minister  at  Chris- 
tiania,  has  been  prevented  from  coming.  Having  lived  fourteen 
years  in  the  United  States  and  being  at  this  moment  the  moving 
force  amongst  the  Norwegian  Unitarians,  he,  more  than  any  other 
man,  would  have  made  intelligible  to  you  the  circumstances  under 
which  our  Norwegian  brethren  are  living  and  working. 

Great  literary  names  are  woven  into  the  history  of  the  liberal  re- 
ligious movement  in  Norway.  At  the  beginning  of  the  last  century 
one  of  the  greatest  poets  of  Norway, — I  doubt  if  I  may  not  say  of 
Scandinavia, — Wergeland,  held  and  professed  in  all  his  writings 
Unitarian  views.  He  was  fearless,  downright,  and  reckless,  and, 
accordingly,  in  his  time  met  with  more  resistance  and  condemna- 
tion than  sympathy  and  appreciation;  but  his  influence  on  his 
people  was  great  and  abiding. 

Close  upon  Wergeland  followed  Bjornson,  at  the  present  day 
Norway's  greatest  poet,  the  thorough-going  idealist,  the  undaunted 
vindicator  of  liberty,  religious  as  well  as  political.  He  is  an  old  man 
now,  but  still  in  full  vigor,  as  warm-hearted  and  as  liberal-minded 
as  a  youth  of  twenty.     Any  form  of  orthodoxy  is  hateful  to  him, 


n6 

and  any  attempt  at  spiritual  subjugation  will  make  him  rise  in 
wrathful,  chivalrous  opposition.  The  spiritual  as  well  as  political 
life  of  Norway  bears  the  mark  of  these  two  great  and  faithful  ser- 
vants to  the  cause  of  liberty. 

Their  names  have,  however,  never  been  associated  directly  with 
that  of  Unitarianism.  When  the  history  of  Unitarianism  in  Norway 
shall  be  written,  it  is  two  other  names  that  will  be  mentioned  first, 
Tambs  Lyche  and  Kristofer  Janson.  Of  the  two,  that  of  Kristofer 
Janson  is  the  best  known.  His  education  for  the  Established  Church, 
his  position  as  a  minister,  and,  primarily,  his  great  literary  and 
oratorical  gifts  secured  for  him  a  notoriety  which  never  fell  to  the 
lot  of  Tambs  Lyche,  though  both  were  equally  devoted  to  the  cause 
of  religious  liberty  and  the  Unitarian  faith,  and  its  fearless  pioneers 
in  their  country. 

Both  men  first  came  in  contact  with  Unitarianism  in  the  United 
States.  Kristofer  Janson  worked  there  for  years,  founding  and 
serving  Unitarian  congregations,  their  highly  appreciated  minister. 
Both  embraced  this  form  of  Christianity  with  strong  and  deep- 
rooted  devotion  and  enthusiasm.  Tambs  Lyche  was  the  first  to 
return  to  his  native  country,  and  with  all  the  strength,  the  skill,  the 
unselfishness  of  a  fine  character  and  a  bright  intellect  he  strove 
by  word  and  pen  to  spread  the  views  and  ideas  so  precious  to  him- 
self amongst  his  countrymen.  He  never  spared  himself,  but,  full 
of  hope  and  cheer,  it  may  be  said  that  he  worked  himself  to  death  in 
a  few  years.  His  work  bore  fruit,  and  was  carried  on  by  Kristofer 
Janson,  who  in  1893  founded  the  first  Norwegian — in  fact,  the  first 
Scandinavian — Unitarian  congregation  at  Christiania.  Regular 
Sunday  services  were  held,  attended  at  times  by  four  or  five  hundred 
men  and  women.  Lectures  were  delivered  by  him  throughout  all 
Norway,  and  even  in  Sweden  and  Denmark  he  became  a  well-known 
and  appreciated  lecturer  and  preacher.  Through  his  many  publi- 
cations— novels  and  poems  as  well  as  religious  and  social  treatises — 
his  views  have  been  spread  all  over  Scandinavia.  Many  are  those 
in  Denmark,  as  well  as  in  Norway,  who  mourn  that  his  failing  health 
and  advanced  age  have  compelled  his  partial  retirement  from  public 
life. 

His  successor  as  minister  to  the  Christiania  congregation  is  Herman 
Haugerud,  a  young  man  who  got  his  theological  education  at  the 


CURTIS  GUILD,  Jr. 
Governor  op  Massachusetts 


HON.  JOHN  D.  LONG 
Boston,  Mass. 


PRES.  CHARLES  W.  ELIOT,  LLX>. 
Cambridge,  Mass. 


REV.  SAMUEL  M.  CROTHERS,  D.D. 
Cambridge,  Mass. 


ii7 

Meadville  Theological  School,  and  for  more  than  ten  years  served 
as  minister  to  Unitarian  congregations  in  different  places  in  the 
United  States.  From  his  experience  amongst  them  he  brought  with 
him  to  Christiania  fresh,  invigorating  ideas,  and,  thanks  to  his 
energy,  his  eloquence  and  zeal,  the  work  there  begun  by  the  two 
other  men  has  greatly  prospered  under  his  guidance.  All  kinds  of 
associations  and  institutions,  such  as  young  people's  clubs,  Sunday- 
schools,  singing  classes,  etc.,  have  sprung  up  in  his  congregation, 
and  his  audience  is  rapidly  and  steadily  increasing. 

Concerning  the  professed  Unitarians  in  Norway — those  who  have 
left  the  National,  the  Established  Church — it  may  be  said  that  they 
form  a  thriving,  zealous  community,  bravely  taking  their  part  in 
the  spreading  of  what  to  them  seems  the  true  Christianity,  faithfully 
working  for  the  realization  of  that  kingdom  of  God  of  which  Jesus 
spoke.  But,  besides  this,  in  Norway,  as  everywhere  else,  the  Estab- 
lished Church — in  this  case  the  Lutheran — is,  so  to  speak,  saturated 
with  Unitarianism.  Opponents  as  well  as  adherents  of  this  form  of 
Christianity  acknowledge  this,  no  one  trying  to  cover  up  the  fact. 
To-day  the  name  of  a  young  minister  of  the  Established  Church, 
Carl  Konow,  is  on  the  lips  of  every  man  in  the  Scandinavian  countries. 
He  seems  to  hold  Unitarian  views  on  all  the  essential  points  of  Chris- 
tianity. His  conception  of  the  birth  and  resurrection  of  Jesus, 
his  ideas  about  the  atonement  and  sacraments,  are  purely  Unitarian, 
and  in  some  lectures  delivered  by  him  at  Bergen  last  year  he  has 
openly  and  clearly  stated  them.  Seven  members  of  his  congregation 
complained  about  this  to  his  bishop,  and,  though  more  than  three 
hundred  men  and  women  protested  against  this  complaint,  the 
bishop  and  church  authorities  have  done  what  was  in  their  power  to 
make  him  give  up  his  pulpit.  In  Norway  a  minister  of  the  Church 
can  be  deprived  of  his  pulpit  only  by  a  decision  of  the  law  courts. 
Pastor  Konow  flatly  refused  to  comply  with  the  wishes  of  the  church 
authorities,  stating  it  as  his  firm  conviction  that  he  would  thereby 
injure  the  Church  and  the  cause  of  truth.  It  is  at  this  moment  un- 
certain whether  the  authorities  will  appeal  to  the  law  courts,  the 
liberal  party  in  the  Church  being  strong,  and  even  a  great  part  of  its 
orthodox  clergy  and  laity  being  adverse  to  go  to  law  about  questions 
so  purely  spiritual.  The  case  in  all  its  details,  especially  Pastor 
Konow's  views  and  standpoint,  is  full  of  interest;   but  time  to-day 


ix8 

will  not  allow  me  to  enter  more  fully  upon  it.  I  must  now  pass  from 
Norway  to  my  own  country,  Denmark. 

Let  me  begin  by  saying  that  you  cannot  speak  of  Danish  Unita- 
rians in  the  same  sense  as  you  can  speak  of  Norwegian,  English, 
American,  or  Hungarian  Unitarians.  In  these  countries  the  Unitarians 
form  a  separate  body.  They  are  men  and  women  who  have  left  the 
Established  Church  to  form  free  and  independent  churches  of  their 
own.  Nothing  of  the  kind  has  yet  been  done  in  Denmark.  It  is 
true  that  some  hundreds  of  men  and  women  holding  Unitarian  views, 
about  eight  years  ago,  founded  an  association  called  by  the  somewhat 
misguiding  name  Del  fri  Kirkesamjund, — the  free  church  association. 
It  is  true  that  this  association  holds  regular  Sunday  services,  and  has 
chosen  for  a  preacher  a  man,  Uffe  Birkedal,  whose  views  conform 
as  closely  as  possible  with  those  of  the  leading  Unitarians  in  Great 
Britain  and  United  States  of  the  present  day.  It  is  true  that  its 
committee  consists  of  professed  Unitarians.  It  is  true  that  at  this 
moment  it  is  looked  upon  by  the  general  public,  and  looks  upon 
itself,  as  an  organization  of  Unitarians.  But,  according  to  its 
statutes,  the  sole  aim  of  the  association  is  "to  spread  free  relig- 
ious knowledge,  and  to  work  for  the  continuation  of  the  Prot- 
estant movement  inaugurated  by  Martin  Luther,"  and  at  this 
present  moment  almost  all  its  members  are  members  of  the 
Established  Church, — "the  People's  Church,"  as  it  is  called  in 
Denmark. 

I  may  perhaps  try  to  make  the  situation  comprehensible  to  you 
by  telling  you  that  all  which  is  required  of  one  as  a  member  of  this 
Established  or  People's  Church  is  that  one  should  be  baptized  accord- 
ing to  the  orthodox  Lutheran  baptismal  formula.  No  subscription  to, 
no  verbal  confession  whatever  of  any  creed  is  required  of  any  lay 
member  of  the  Church.  If  a  certificate  can  be  produced,  stating 
that  you  have  been  baptized  by  a  minister  in  the  Church,  you  are 
compelled  to  pay  church  rates,  and  are  entitled  to  the  use  of  the 
church  buildings  and  the  administrations  of  its  ministers  until  you 
shall  either  have  sent  in  to  your  parish  clergyman  notice  that  you 
desire  to  leave  the  Church  or  have  formally  entered  another  religious 
body — Roman  Catholic,  Methodist,  Jewish — legally  acknowledged 
by  the  State  as  an  independent  church.  In  consequence  of  this 
leniency  on  the  part  of  the  Church  the  people  as  a  whole — according 


ii9 

to  the  last  census  97  per  cent,  of  the  population — belongs  to  the 
Established  Church. 

Now  those  Unitarian  men  and  women  who  eight  years  ago  united 
in  an  association  were  then,  as  I  have  said,  with  one  or  two  exceptions, 
members  of  the  Established  Church,  and  after  some  very  brief  vacilla- 
tion they  made  up  their  mind  to  remain  so,  and,  rather  than  leave 
the  People's  Church  and  form  a  separate  religious  body,  to  remain 
in  it,  openly  professing  their  faith,  and  laboring  with  all  their  might 
for  a  reformation  of  this  Church,  so  that  its  Unitarian  members 
might  in  future  be  enabled  to  range  themselves  within  its  pale  in 
free  congregations  in  full  accordance  with  their  religious  convictions. 

This  surely  must  seem  natural  and,  I  hope  and  trust,  right  to  you. 
To  remain  part  of  the  Church  into  which  it  has  been  born  is,  and 
ought  surely  to  be,  the  heart's  desire  of  any  religious  movement. 
The  disadvantages  of  forming  denominations  and  sects,  the  advan- 
tage of  living  under  the  old  roof  as  part  of  the  whole  flock,  are  so  self- 
evident  that  I  should  only  waste  your  time  by  pointing  them  out. 
Better  strive  to  unite  on  the  points  whereon  you  agree  than  to  separate 
on  the  points  of  disagreement.  The  great  question  in  this,  case  is 
this:  Is  it  possible,  is  there  any  chance  whatever,  that  the  Danish 
Church  be  so  reformed  that  Unitarians  can  honestly  and  openly  live 
inside  its  walls?  We  believe  so,  or  we  would  not  stay  in  or  labor 
for  it. 

In  the  ranks  of  orthodoxy  there  is  a  great,  vigorous,  liberal  party, 
consisting  of  men  who  are  at  least  as  anxious  as  we  are  that  this 
reformation  should  be  accomplished.  They  argue  in  this  way: 
All  that  the  Grundlov  (the  constitution)  says  about  the  Estab- 
lished Church — the  Church  supported  and  governed  by  the  people 
and  the  king — is  that  it  is  Evangelical-Lutheran.  No  definition  of 
these  words  is  given.  Now,  whatever  they  mean  on  paper,  it  is  a 
recognized  fact  that  in  reality  this  Church  has  always  contained,  and 
at  times  almost  consisted  of  men  who  held  Unitarian  views.  Badly 
disguised  Unitarianism  has  been  preached,  and  is  to-day  preached, 
from  many  of  its  pulpits.  At  the  present  time,  more  than  ever  before, 
Unitarian  views  are  being  propagated  throughout  the  whole  country 
by  translations  of  the  modern  German  theological  works  and  by 
men,  lay  and  ecclesiastical,  who  have  been  influenced  by  these.  We 
could  not,  even  if  we  would, — the  liberal  orthodox  party  argues, — 


120 

expel  these  heretics  from  the  People's  Church.  All  we  could  accom- 
plish if  we  tried  would  be  the  exclusion  of  a  handful  of  honest,  sincere, 
religious  men  and  women,  while  we  should  keep  amongst  us  all  the 
hypocritical  and  indifferent  infidels.  But,  even  if  we  could  by  main 
force  cleanse  the  Church  of  Unitarians,  hidden  as  well  as  professed, 
we  would  not  try.  We  could  not  conscientiously  use  the  arm  of  the 
civil  power  against  purely  spiritual  opponents.  Believing  it,  as  we 
do,  to  be  well  and  beneficial  for  the  people  that  it  should  uphold  and 
support  a  common  national  institution  for  religious  education  and 
edification,  we  want  the  Established  Church  preserved,  but  at  the 
same  time  we  maintain  that  an  Established,  a  State  Church  is  mainly 
a  civic  institution,  which  must  not  be  mistaken  for  a  missionary 
station.  The  State  must  scrupulously  avoid  all  spiritual  guardian- 
ship over  its  citizens.  Its  Church  must  at  all  times  be  made  wide 
enough  for  the  bulk  of  the  people  to  live  inside  its  pale  in  freedom 
and  honesty. 

According  to  the  present  constitution,  which  we  believe  the  people 
unwilling  to  alter,  the  Church  is  Evangelical-Lutheran.  Roman 
Catholics  are  excluded.  Men  with  Methodist,  Adventist,  and  Quaker 
views  have  left  it  to  form  legally  recognized  religious  associations  of 
their  own,  but  these  Unitarians  have  stuck,  and  still  stick  to  it.  They 
have  formed  part  and  parcel  of  it  as  long  as  it  has  existed,  and  cannot 
now  be  expelled.  Would  it  not  be  best  for  us  as  for  them,  for  the 
Church  itself  and  the  people  at  large,  that  this  should  be  officially 
acknowledged,  that  we  should  give  these  words  "Evangelical- 
Lutheran"  a  spiritual,  not  a  literal,  interpretation?  Would  not  the 
Church  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  Martin  Luther, 
more  honest,  stronger,  and  purer,  if  it  allowed,  yea,  encouraged  them 
to  range  themselves  within  its  walls  in  accordance  with  their  con- 
victions ?  Let  us  make  of  this  national  institution  which  we  call  our 
People's  Church  a  real  Protestant  church,  where  each  man  has  a 
right  and  a  duty  to  read  and  honestly  interpret  the  Bible  by  his  jwn 
light,  a  national  church  of  which  any  Danish  man,  woman,  or  child 
professing  him  or  herself  a  disciple  of  Christ  and  a  Protestant,  may 
be  a  member, — a  temple  with  open  doors  and  warm  welcome  for 
the  sons  of  the  land. 

Now  this  party,  this  programme  for  a  church  organization,  dates 
more  than  seventy  years  back.    I  cannot  here  mention  the  great 


121 

liberal  men  who  have  fought  for  it.  Grundtvig,  the  great,  towering 
religious  genius  of  the  last  century  in  our  country,  was — himself  a 
convinced  Trinitarian — the  originator  of  it;  and  foremost  amongst 
its  dauntless  champions  stands  the  father  of  our  minister,  Pastor 
Birkedal,  an  orthodox  minister  in  the  Established  Church  but  a 
fearless  vindicator  of  spiritual  freedom.  Slowly,  step  by  step,  this 
party  has  led  the  National  Church  towards  this  glorious  goal,  always 
having  the  bishops  and  bulk  of  the  clergy  against  them,  generally  sup- 
ported by  the  people.  Though  the  conservative  of  to-day  acknowl- 
edges that  the  steps  taken  in  former  days  towards  greater  liberty, 
greater  tolerance  inside  the  Church,  have  been  beneficial  for  the 
orthodox  party  as  well  as  for  the  Church  as  a  whole,  he  still  looks  at 
proposed  liberal  measures  with  fear  and  distrust,  and  every  con- 
cession has  to  be  wrested  from  him. 

Now  when  our  Del  fri  Kirkesamfund  made  its  demand  that  the 
Unitarian  members  of  the  Church  be  entitled  to  unite  in  free  con- 
gregations, free  so  far  as  control  of  creeds  and  dogmas,  rituals  and 
preaching  are  concerned,  but  still  members  of  the  main  body,  gather- 
ing strength  and  succor  from  it,  infusing  new  blood  into  its  veins,  a 
new  combatant  entered  upon  the  arena.  Hitherto  the  "heretic,"  the 
"infidel,"  had  held  his  peace,  remained  in  the  background,  quietly 
profiting  by  any  liberal  measures  adopted  by  the  clergy  and  orthodox 
laity.  The  question  whether  the  State  could  dispense  with  creeds 
and  confessions  in  its  Church — make  it  through  and  through  Protes- 
tant— had  mainly  been  a  theoretical  question,  a  question  of  principles. 
Now  at  a  stroke  it  became  a  dire  wrestling  about  facts.  What  shall 
be  done  with  these  men  and  women,  legally  members  of  the  Church, 
openly  professed  Unitarians,  demanding  a  reformation  of  their 
country's  Church — the  Church  supported  in  part  by  themselves — 
which  will  enable  them  to  live  honestly  inside  it?  This  question 
rapidly  rose  to  the  surface,  and  in  a  few  years  became  the  pivot  on 
which  the  whole  church  policy  turned.  Men  and  women  who  had 
never  concerned  themselves  about  church  affairs,  hearing  about  the 
Unitarian  question  are  now  seeking  information  about  it,  and  in 
their  minds  are  weighing  the  old  creed  and  dogmas,  the  old  in- 
terpretation of  the  Bible  and  its  teachings  with  the  views  and  con- 
ceptions held  by  Christian  Unitarians  to-day,  and  are  trying  to  form 
an  opinion  for  themselves. 


122 

Two  great  advantages  have  then  been  attained  by  our  decision  to 
remain  in  the  Church: — 

First,  the  knowledge  of  the  Unitarian  faith  and  views  is  spreading 
in  ways  far  broader  and  all-embracing  than  would  have  been  the  case 
if  we,  instead  of  standing  up  for  a  reformation  of  the  Church,  had 
quietly  left  it  in  order  to  form  a  new  and  small  denomination. 

Secondly, — and  this  is  by  far  the  greatest  gain, — the  new  proposal 
that  the  Unitarian  members  of  the  Church  should  be  allowed  to  form 
congregations  of  their  own,  that  Unitarianism  should  be  openly 
and  legally  preached  alongside  with  Trinitarianism  in  the  Established 
Church,  has  undoubtedly  greatly  augmented  religious  interest,  zeal, 
and  sincerity  in  the  Church.  Hitherto  many  devout  men  and  women 
have  dozed  away,  comfortably  convinced  that  creeds  and  dogmas 
were  the  concern  of  the  authorities.  You  might  conform  to  them  or 
differ  from  them,  but  the  State  through  its  officials  would  see  to  it 
that  the  gospel  was  interpreted  uniformly  all  through  its  churches 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  country.  Now  they  hear  of  a  new  pro- 
posal, that  the  State  should  lay  the  Bible  on  the  table,  open  to  the 
interpretation  of  every  man  and  woman  according  to  their  own  light 
and  conscience.  They  hear  that  it  might  come  to  this,  that  the  State 
should  say  through  its  own  Church,  "  Read  and  choose  for  yourself." 
Men  and  women  are  awakening  to  the  feeling  of  more  personal 
responsibility  in  spiritual  matters,  they  are  rising,  they  are  uniting 
to  make  a  manly,  faithful  stand  for  their  religious  conviction,  whatever 
it  may  be. 

Surely,  this  is  a  great  gain.  So,  even  if  we  do  not  win  our  point, 
even  if  we  be  at  last  compelled  in  the  interest  of  truth  and  honesty 
to  leave  the  old  Church,  we  shall  feel  that  we  have  not  labored  in 
vain. 

Of  the  missionary  work  done  by  us  I  can  speak  quite  briefly. 
It  is  carried  on  by  very  much  the  same  means  and  in  the  same  way 
as  in  England,  Norway,  and  other  countries.  We  hold  regular  Sun- 
day services  in  Copenhagen  and  in  Aarhus  in  Jutland,  fairly  well 
attended  in  both  places.  Through  our  postal  mission  and  our  two 
periodicals,  and  through  tracts  and  books,  translations  and  original 
works,  by  meetings  held  at  different  times  and  places,  by  words  written 
and  spoken  wherever  a  hearing  may  be  had,  we  strive  to  propagate 
our  views.    Much  zeal  is  here  exhibited,  and  in  this  work  we  are 


123 

indebted  to  our  English  brethren  for  invaluable  help  and  assistance, 
material  as  well  as  spiritual.  Compared  to  our  brethren  in  other 
lands,  we  fall  sadly  short  and  feel  very  humble  and  insignificant  in 
this  respect;  but  we  are  doing  our  work  cheerfully  and  hopefully, 
sustained  by  the  blessed  conviction  that,  placed  where  we  are,  under 
the  given  circumstances,  we  have  been  intrusted  with  a  special 
mission, — that  of  standing  up  bravely  for  the  realization  of  the  ideal 
Christian  community,  the  Catholic  Protestant  Church. 

At  the  conclusion  of  Mr.  Berg's  address  it  was  voted  to  postpone 
the  two  other  papers  on  the  program  until  to-morrow,  after  which 
the  meeting  adjourned  at  3.30  o'clock  to  attend  the  various  depart- 
ment meetings  arranged  for  the  remainder  of  the  afternoon. 

Note. — The  paper  by  Professor  O.  E.  Lindberg,  of  Gotheburg,  on  "The 
Religious  Situation  in  Sweden,"  crowded  out  of  its  order  by  the  exceeding  length 
of  preceding  papers,  was  read  by  him  at  an  overflow  meeting  in  the  South  Con- 
gregational Church  on  the  evening  of  September  25,  presided  over  by  Rev. 
Dr.  T.  R.  Slicer,  of  New  York.  It  is  printed  here  in  full,  together  with  a  report 
on  "  Liberal  Religion  in  New  Zealand,"  made  at  the  banquet  on  Thursday  even- 
ing, September  26,  by  the  delegate  from  that  country,  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond, 
and  a  communication  on  "Religious  Conditions  in  Australia,"  forwarded  by 
Rev.  Charles  Strong,  of  Melbourne,  and  read  by  title  only  because  of  lack  of 
time.     Prof.  Goldwin  Smith's  paper  was  kindly  forwarded  to  the  Committee. 


124 


THE  CONDITION  AND   PROSPECTS  OF   LIBERAL 
CHRISTIANITY  IN   SWEDEN. 

BY   PROFESSOR  F.  O.  LINDBERG,  OF  GOTHENBURG. 

Before  entering  upon  my  theme  I  beg  to  express  to  your  Executive 
Committee  my  warmest  thanks  for  the  opportunity  it  has  given 
me  to  attend  this  magnificent  congress,  in  the  country  where  Emer- 
son published  to  the  world  his  grand,  suggestive  thoughts  and  the 
town  where  Parker  gave  eloquent  utterance  to  his  spiritually  awak- 
ening and  radical  opinions. 

In  dealing  with  the  subject,  "The  Condition  of  Liberal  Christi- 
anity in  Sweden,"  three  points  of  view  are  chiefly,  I  think,  to  be  con- 
sidered: first,  the  churchly  one;  then  the  one  concerning  dissenters, 
or  free  religious  fellowships  in  general;  finally,  the  one  respecting 
the  more  philosophical  phase  of  free  Christian  thought  among  us. 
There  is  in  Sweden  a  National  or  Established  Lutheran  Church 
and  also  various  dissenting  sects,  independent  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authority  of  the  State.  It  is  true  of  the  National  Church,  as  for  the 
most  part  of  all  religious  institutions  which  have  lived  through 
ages,  that  she  clings  to  traditions.  This  has  most  recently 
found  particular  expression — to  cite  but  one  example — in  a  petition 
which  our  bishops,  supported  by  some  of  the  independent  sects, 
presented  to  the  government,  in  order  to  retain  their  influence  over 
the  colleges;  for  this  influence  is,  in  consequence  of  a  lately  estab- 
lished superior  board  of  managers  for  the  aforesaid  schools,  about 
to  slip  out  of  their  hands. 

We  may,  however,  acknowledge  that  our  Established  Church  has 
gradually  learned  to  be  comparatively  tolerant.  An  undeniable  ex- 
ception from  this  rule  is  a  faction  which  regards  itself  as  super- 
orthodox,  but  which,  in  fact,  is  only  a  sect  within  the  Swedish 
National  Church.  It  is  called  Schartauanism.  It  seems  to  me  as  if 
this  religious  species  wished  that  all  liberal  religious  thought  had 


125 

but  a  single  throat,  in  order  that  with  one  stroke  it  might  be  cut  off. 
This  church  party  has  ministers  still  characterized  by  quite  a  medi- 
aeval cast  of  mind,  hostile  not  only  to  religious  evolution,  but  to 
progress  in  general,  which  it  looks  upon  as  leading  to  a  weakened 
morality.  Yet  it  cannot  be  denied  all  merit.  There  is  something 
of  steel  in  its  constitution.  Characters,  though  old-fashioned  and 
strongly  opposed  to  the  spirit  of  the  time,  it  has  certainly  pro- 
duced. But  much  beyond  the  negative  merit  of  a  certain  tolerance 
our  National  Church  has  not  reached.  Modifications  for  the  better 
effected  by  it  are  few  and  trifling.  She  does  not,  as  a  rule,  want 
to  hear  a  word  about  a  more  thorough  alteration  of  her  dogmatic 
notions  and  antiquated  ceremonies  and  institutions. 

Notwithstanding  this  general  state  of  the  National  Church,  many 
individual  religious  thinkers  within  it — it  is  a  pleasure  to  say — 
cherish  enlightened  opinions,  often  far-reaching.  At  the  universities 
we  meet  such  liberal-minded  theologians  as  the  professors  PerEklund, 
Nat.  Soderblom,  and  G.  M.  Pfannenstill,  the  university  lecturer  T. 
Segerstedt,  and  others.  In  this  connection  I  may  mention  as  a 
cheering  symptom  the  increasing  interest  in  foreign  religious  reports 
and  doctrines,  to  which,  among  other  things,  a  work  edited  by  the 
above-named  Soderblom,  containing  translated  extracts  from  foreign 
religious  writers,  gives  testimony.  But  even  clergymen,  and  they 
not  a  few,  outside  the  universities  harbor  free  religious  views. 
Among  these,  Rector  S.  A.  Frees  in  Stockholm,  our  most  distinguished 
authority  on  Biblical  criticism,  known  even  abroad,  ought  to  be 
mentioned  in  the  first  place;  but  there  are  also  many  others,  whom 
I  cannot,  for  want  of  time,  here  enumerate.  A  liberal  church 
periodical,  entitled  Christianity  and  our  Time,  lately  started,  counts 
among  its  collaborators  some  twenty  clergymen  more  or  less  liberal- 
minded.  There  exists  also  in  Gothenburg  a  lately  formed  society 
for  research  into  religious  history,  whose  leader  is  a  theological 
teacher  at  one  of  the  public  colleges  in  that  town.  This  society 
has  edited  a  series  of  writings,  entitled  "  Popular  Books  on  Religious 
History,"  being  translations  from  the  best  that  modern  religious 
thought  and  research  present  to  us. 

As  for  dissenting  or  independent  congregations  in  general,  within  or 
outside  the  Church,  we  are  gratefully  indebted  to  them  for  a  good 
deal  of  sound  blood  in  our  social  body.    The  moral  discipline  which 


126 

they  exercise  over  their  individual  members  is  in  some  respects  a 
salt  against  the  putrefaction  which  social  vices  are  inclined  to  pro- 
duce in  all  times  and  in  every  nation.  A  noticeable  merit  is  also 
that  with  few  exceptions  they  take  their  religion  in  earnest  and 
have  repudiated  almost  all  outworn  religious  ceremonies,  desiring 
to  "worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  I  am  sorry,  how- 
ever, to  say  that  in  our  country  they  are  not  so  advanced  in  point 
of  doctrine.  They  are  indeed  in  this  respect  more  conservative 
than  the  Church  herself.  They  tolerate  very  unwillingly  members 
who  hold  a  little  broader  views  than  they  themselves. 

But  what  is  still  more  to  be  regretted  is  the  course  of  action  taken 
by  such  men  as  the  famous  P.  Waldenstrom.  At  first  he  put  forth 
a  few  sound  and  reformatory  opinions  bearing  on  the  dogma  of 
vicarious  satisfaction,  and  thereby  called  into  existence  a  large  and 
important  party  within  the  National  Church.  Afterwards,  however, 
he  not  only  cut  short  his  reformative  activity,  but  also  stiffened  the 
other  dogmas  much  more  than  that  Church  herself,  being  more 
anxious  than  she  ever  was  to  condemn  all  religious  research,  above 
everything  Biblical  criticism,  which  proved  a  considerable  check 
to  the  rise  and  growth  of  free  thought. 

Yet  even  within  non-conformist  religious  circles  men  of  enlight- 
ened mind  are  not  wanting,  though  like  the  mentally  more  advanced 
spirits  of  the  Middle  Ages  they  often  have  their  opinions  enveloped 
in  a  chrysalis  of  dogmatic  phrases.  Yet  a  couple  of  them  have 
openly  spoken  out  their  mind,  among  these  the  noted  Dr.  J. 
Ekman  in  Stockholm.  He  is  the  most  significant  and  most  worthy 
representative  of  modern  theology  within  the  non -conformist  re- 
ligious bodies  in  Sweden,  for  which  he  also  has  been  very  sharply 
taken  to  task  by  his  former  fellow-worshippers. 

In  the  third  category  I  comprehend  all  those  who  outwardly 
belong  to  no  established  creed  but  the  Church,  but  who  are  influenced 
by  philosophy,  so  that  by  its  means,  in  a  certain  way,  they  have 
formed  or  modified  their  Christian  belief.  Philosophy — this  bene- 
ficial purgatory  of  religions — is  to  some  extent  inherent  in  the  blood 
of  our  people.  We  have  in  later  times  had  several  important 
thinkers,  such  as  Erik  Gustaf  Geijer,  Hoijer,  P.  Wikner,  Victor 
Rydberg,  Nyblaeus,  and,  above  all,  Christopher  Bostrom,  as  well 
as  at  the  present  moment  the  prominent  professor  Vit.  Norstrom 


127 

at  the  university  to  which  I  myself  belong.  Three  of  these 
especially  (to  wit,  Bostrom,  Wikner,  and  Victor  Rydberg)  have  enor- 
mously influenced  our  moral  and  spiritual  ways  of  thought.  They 
have  widened,  deepened,  and  elevated  it  even  where  it  has  retained 
the  letter  of  orthodoxy.  Still  better,  this  religious-philosophical 
movement  has  not  only  brought  much  truth  into  view,  but  it  has 
also  been  able  to  create  characters  really  religious.  It  has  gradually 
dawned  upon  the  ordinary  religious  mind  that  there  may  exist 
such  a  thing  as  a  Christian  life  based  throughout  on  liberal  Christian 
thought.  This  seems  to  me  highly  important,  since  because  of 
this  assurance  timid,  pious-minded  souls  venture  to  think.  The 
men  and  women  who  in  this  semi-philosophical  religious  manner 
are  framing  their  spiritual  life  are  not  a  few,  and  they  are  increasing 
in  number  day  by  day.  Many  of  them  are  wealthy  and  independent 
persons,  who  sacrifice  comparatively  much  on  the  altar  of  a  healthy 
religious  enlightenment.  In  Stockholm,  for  instance,  there  is  living 
a  very  rich,  highly  cultured  man,  whose  name  I  am  not  allowed  to 
mention,  who  spends  several  hundred  pounds  a  year  for  this  purpose. 
Among  men  who  preach  the  Bible  word  in  the  light  of  free  thought 
and,  let  me  add,  with  genuine  prophetic  ardor,  Nat.  Beskow  should 
be  named.  Even  women  are  working  with  us  along  this  line,  though 
for  the  most  part  by  writing,  such  as  Anna  Roos. 

It  should  here  also  be  noticed  that  theosophy  and  spiritual- 
ism have  in  some  measure  acted  upon  our  religious  minds. 
There  exists  in  Sweden,  though  sporadically,  a  theosophical 
Christianity. 

If  we  now,  for  a  moment,  touch  upon  the  question  which 
dogmas  have  been  obliged  to  yield  to  the  progressive  march  of  the 
new  spirit  in  my  country,  this  must,  for  want  of  time,  be  treated  of 
in  a  few  words.  I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  preaching  of  the  devil 
and  hell,  with  all  their  horrors,  at  length  begins  to  fade  away  into 
the  past.  Both  the  Established  Church  and  the  non-conformist  bodies 
in  their  public  teaching  lay  more  stress  on  the  love  of  God  and 
life  everlasting  than  on  eternal  death.  People  obviously  begin  to 
look  upon  evil  from  somewhat  different  points  of  view  than  hereto- 
fore. It  is  as  if  there  were  passing  through  our  common  religious 
consciousness  a  touch  of  the  meaning  of  those  lines  in  Longfellow's 
"Golden  Legend":— 


128 

"  It  is  Lucifer, 
The  son  of  mystery, 
And  since  God  suffers  him  to  be, 
He,  too,  is  God's  minister, 
And  labors  for  some  good 
By  us  not  understood." 

In  reality,  it  is  the  spirit  of  the  time  which  forces  the  preachers  to 
humanize  their  teaching  rather  than  the  demand  of  the  church 
people,  whose  bigotry  too  often  prevents  this.  With  greater  diffi- 
culty certain  other  dogmas  give  way,  such  as  that  of  the  Trinity,  of 
the  vicarious  atonement,  of  justification  only  by  the  grace  of  God, 
and  so  forth.  And  no  wonder,  for  the  central  idea  of  "the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount,"  the  idea  which  identifies  inner,  everlasting 
bliss  with  spiritual  and  moral  perfection,  has  not  yet  largely  dawned 
upon  our  religious  world  in  Sweden.  To  it  spiritual  life  is  still 
more  a  mechanical  procedure  from  without  than  any  organic  process 
within  the  mind. 

Finally,  in  casting  the  horoscope  of  the  religious  future  of  my 
fatherland,  I  feel  the  difficulty,  not  to  say  the  impossibility,  of  play- 
ing the  prophet,  all  the  more  so  as  the  religious  movements  in  my 
own  country  are  very  intimately  connected  with  the  spiritual  evolu- 
tion of  Europe  at  large, — nay,  with  that  of  the  whole  world,  as  nowa- 
days, more  perhaps  than  ever  in  the  days  of  Neo-Platonism,  Orient 
and  Occident  are  influencing  each  other.  I  can  indicate  but  my 
own  opinion  and  hopes.  These  are  to  the  effect  that  we  are  slowly, 
but  surely,  advancing  towards  the  hour  when  those  of  our  nation 
who  are  more  seriously  interested  in  spiritual  and  moral  things  will 
be  penetrated  at  least  intuitively  with  somewhat  the  following  ideas: 
First,  that  the  Sermon  of  the  Mount  is  the  kernel  of  Christianity 
and  the  flower  of  all  religion.  Further,  that  the  regeneration  which 
the  Fourth  Gospel  rightly,  though  not  for  the  first  time  in  history, 
puts  into  spiritual  thought  and  life,  is  certainly  a  wonderful  mental 
process,  initiated  and  in  every  way  forwarded  by  forces  divine  and 
eternal,  but  that  it  has  by  no  means  anything  to  do  with  the  dog- 
matical, artificial,  and  juridical  procedure  which  the  Christian 
churches  and  sects  have  made  of  it;  in  a  word,  that  spiritual  life 
is  of  such  a  profoundly  ethical  nature  that  all  real  inner  harmony 
is  brought  about  by  moral  and  mental  perfection.  I  think  also, 
and  hope,  that  the   time   is  not   far  off  when  dogmas  totally  at 


129 

variance  with  all  humane,  ethical  thought,  such  as  the  dogma  of 
eternal  damnation,  that  of  vicarious  expiatory  sacrifice,  that  of  three 
personalities  within  the  Godhead  equally  divine  and  perfect,  that 
of  eating  the  flesh  and  drinking  the  blood  of  the  Holy  One,  shall 
be  cherished  only  by  a  few  bigoted  souls,  whereas  the  greater  part 
of  our  people  will  have  thrown  them  over.  They  will  understand 
them  to  be  based  not  on  the  Gospels,  but  on  quite  heathen  habits 
of  thought;  not  very  elevated,  either,  as  comparative  religious  history 
has  fully  shown.  And  a  respectable  minority  will,  I  hope,  devote 
themselves  very  earnestly  to  a  religion  which  shall  have,  as  its  con- 
fession of  faith,  only  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  especially 
the  Gospels;  but  according  to  their  spirit,  not  in  bondage  to  their 
letter.  And  this  minority  will  have  its  dogmas,  in  case  we  are  to 
speak  of  such,  modified  by  the  parliament  of  psychical  and  religious 
research,  as  well  as  of  spiritual  and  philosophical  thought.  Much 
in  my  dear  native  country  seems  to  point  in  this  direction. 

We  have,  however,  to  make  a  fight  also  against  materialism  in 
Sweden.  This  is  making  its  appearance  not  so  much  within  the 
middle  classes  as  within  the  upper  ten  and  among  the  organized 
laborers,  being  the  issue  of  the  irrational  and  sterile  dogmatism  of 
the  church  bodies.  The  religious  nihilism  of  the  socialistic  party, 
too,  has  been  fostered  to  a  great  extent  by  the  Church  herself,  which 
has  omitted  to  take  serious  interest  in  the  needs  of  the  working 
classes.  In  defeating  materialistic  agencies  I  am  convinced  that 
true  scientific  psychical  research  and  natural  science  will  both  be 
of  excellent  service.  For  the  time  is,  I  believe,  not  far  off  when 
the  strongly  convergent  lines  of  these  two  will  meet  at  a  point 
where  they  will  demonstrate,  jointly,  the  truth  of  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  as  well  as  of  the  opinion  that  this  earth-life  is  but  a 
stepping-stone  in  a  mighty  series  of  progressions  towards  the  fully 
developed  and  perfected  kingdom  of  God.  Thus  the  idea  will  have 
dawned  upon  our  mind, — the  grand  idea  which  the  Fourth  Gospel 
puts  forth  in  its  sixteenth  chapter,  that  of  evolutionary  Christianity. 
In  this  sign  we  shall  be  victorious  in  Sweden  and  all  over  the  world, 
and  along  this  line  we  shall  come  to  understand  the  familiar  word 
in  the  same  Fourth  Gospel:  "Ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth 
shall  make  you  free." 


i3° 


THE    PROSPECTS    OF   LIBERAL  RELIGION   IN 
AUSTRALIA. 

BY  CHARLES  STRONG,  D.D.,  OF  THE  AUSTRALIAN  CHURCH,  MEL- 
BOURNE. 

I  thank  your  Executive  Council  for  the  honor  of  an  invitation  to 
your  International  Congress  of  Liberal  Thinkers  and  Workers. 

I  greatly  regret  my  inability  to  avail  myself  of  the  privilege  of 
being  present  as  a  humble  representative  of  the  cause  of  Free  Relig- 
ion in  Australia,  and  of  enjoying  the  fellowship  of  leaders  in  the 
realm  of  Religion  whose  names  have  long  been  to  some  of  us  in  this 
distant  land  household  words. 

But  I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  fall  in  with  the  suggestion  of  your 
Honorary  Secretary,  and  to  contribute  a  short  paper  on  "The  Pros- 
pects of  Liberal  Religion  in  Australia,"  so  that  Victoria  may  not  be 
altogether  unrepresented. 

It  may  be  well  to  begin  by  defining  what  I,  at  least,  mean  by 
"Liberal  Religion." 

By  Religion  I  mean  an  attitude  or  self-relation  of  the  human  spirit 
towards  God  as  the  informing  spirit  of  all. 

By  Liberal  Religion  I  mean,  first,  Religion  that  has  outgrown  all 
Dogma — miraculously  conveyed  and  attested  communication,  un- 
alterable, to  be  received  on  authority,  by  all  true  believers — just  as  a 
winged  creature  has  outgrown  its  chrysalis  form.  I  mean  Religion 
whose  windows  alike  of  heart  and  mind  are  thrown  open  to  the  East, 
to  receive  any  larger  light  and  any  fresh  inspiration  of  Love,  which 
regards  no  theological  creed  as  other  than  a  cup  in  which  a  draught 
from  the  ever-flowing  stream  has  been  temporarily  imprisoned,  and 
which  recognizes  evolution  as  a  universal  law  of  human  thought  and 
experience,  even  in  the  sphere  of  things  divine. 

By  Liberal  Religion  I  mean,  secondly,  that  ethical  and  spiritual 
attitude,  as  of  free  sons  and  daughters  towards  the  spirit  of  all, 


i3i 

flowering  and  fruiting  in  a  corresponding  attitude  of  fraternal  good 
will  to  man,  of  which  Jesus  of  Nazareth  may  be  taken  as  the  primi- 
tive type,  and  which  has  in  all  ages  been  the  differentiating  mark 
of  his  followers. 

Liberal  Religion,  as  I  understand  it,  rejects  the  whole  dogmatic 
conception  of  Religion  as  irrational,  unhistorical,  and  unspiritual. 
It  dethrones  historical  and  theological  beliefs  as  idols,  when  ex- 
alted into  the  chief  seat,  to  put  in  their  place,  as  the  very  centre  of  the 
picture,  the  underlying  theme  to  the  whole  symphony,  the  key  to  life 
here  and  hereafter, — Love, — spiritual,  self-sacrificing,  and  yet  self- 
fulfilling  Love  of  the  Whole,  of  the  Highest,  and  of  all  in  Him. 

Liberal  Religion  is  thus  no  mere  negation  (though  it  necessarily 
contains  a  negative  "moment"),  but  is  a  very  clear  and  distinct 
positive.  It  is  the  positive  reaffirmation  of  Ethical  Faith  (as  distin- 
guished from  Intellectual  Belief,  as  being  the  distinguishing  mark  and 
test  of  the  "Christian,"  as  it  is  further  the  reaffirmation  that  "the 
churches'  one  foundation"  and  the  one  bond  of  fellowship  in  the 
historic,  apostolic,  and  catholic  Church  of  God — semper,  ubique,  et  ab 
omnibus — is  Love.  "He  that  abides  in  love  abides  in  God,  and  God 
abides  in  him,"  as  the  Scriptures  say. 

As  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers,  we  are  not,  I  take  it, 
seeking  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil,  by  restoring  the  ethical  and  religious 
to  that  place  which  they  held  of  old  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  but  from 
which  they  have  so  long  been  banished  by  the  traditions  and  com- 
mandments of  men.  What,  in  short,  we  are  seeking,  is  a  revival  of 
Religion  pure  and  undefiled,  and  through  this  a  Revival  of  the  Ideal 
of  the  Catholic  Church  throughout  all  the  world,  as  the  family  and 
the  army  of  the  God  who  is  "  Spirit,  Light,  and  Love." 

Now,  if  I  am  asked  what  are  the  prospects  in  Australia  of  Liberal 
Religion,  in  the  sense  I  have  indicated,  I  cannot  say  that  at  present 
they  are  altogether  encouraging.  The  old  dogmatic  conception  of 
Religion  still  prevails  in  our  churches. 

We  have  lately  had  much  talk  of  reunion  of  churches.  Com- 
mittees have  discussed  possible  bases  of  reunion,  between  Presby- 
terian and  Anglican,  on  the  one  hand,  and  between  Presbyterians, 
Methodists,  and  Congregationalists,  on  the  other,  but  as  yet  without 
any  very  definite  result.  The  dominant  idea  in  all  these  negotia- 
tions still  is  that  religion  is,  more  or  less,  Dogma,  even  though  the 


132 

Dogma  may  be  attenuated  and  reduced  to  a  rag,  and  that  it  is  also,, 
more  or  less,  essentially  an  Historical  Belief. 

The  old  conception  of  the  Bible  as  "infallible,"  miraculously 
written  and  miraculously  preserved  through  the  ages,  and  from  which 
a  dogmatic  creed,  necessary  to  "salvation"  from  a  miraculous  "hell," 
must  be  extracted  and  formulated,  still  prevails;  and  any  union 
proposed  is  always  based  on  uniformity  of  belief,  not  on  unity  of  Faith, 
spirit,  purpose,  and  active  endeavor  for  the  "  Kingdom  of  God "  on 
earth.  Our  Anglican  brethren  still  harp  on  the  old  string  of  the 
"historic  episcopate"  as  being  of  the  very  essence  of  the  Faith! 

As  an  illustration  of  the  whereabouts  of  a  section  at  least  of  our 
people,  a  "monster  meeting"  was  lately  called  by  advertisement  in 
Melbourne  Town  Hall.  A  bishop  occupied  the  chair,  and  different 
churches  were  represented  by  the  speakers.  The  object  for  which 
this  great  meeting  of  three  thousand  people  was  held  was  declared 
to  be  "to  reaffirm  the  old  Theology." 

At  a  large  Anglican  Congress  held  some  time  ago  in  Melbourne 
many  important  questions  were  discussed,  and  some  liberal  senti- 
ments were  uttered  by  individual  speakers;  but  the  great  problem 
of  Religion  and  the  Church  was  not  faced,  and  is  not  yet  faced,  I 
think,  by  any  of  the  churches. 

Our  people,  moreover,  are  immersed  in  the  pursuit  of  business, 
politics,  and  pleasure.  A  very  large  proportion  of  them  never 
darken  a  church  door,  and  show  no  interest  in  anything  distinctly 
religious.  Sunday  is  to  many  a  mere  day  of  pleasure,  and  young 
people  drift  outside  of  churches  and  religious  influences.  Our  pre- 
vailing ideas,  if  not  theoretically,  are  practically  somewhat  material- 
istic, and  consequently  religion  is  at  a  discount,  church  life  is  not 
progressive  or  inspiring,  and  the  home  life  loses  its  sacredness  and 
piety.  Our  churches  are  often  said  to  be  out  of  touch  with  modern 
thought  and  out  of  sympathy  with  the  democratic  aspirations  of  the 
people.  Some  of  the  more  cultured  and  many  of  the  working 
classes  are  thus  alienated  from  the  Church,  which  no  longer  takes 
its  legitimate  place  as  the  Soul  and  Spiritual  Centre  of  the  national 
life. 

There  is,  consequently,  not  that  interest  in  churches  and  Religion 
favorable  to  the  reform  of  Religion,  and  the  demands  of  Liberal 
Religion  not  for  new  ritual  or  new  dogma,  but  for  a  new  fellowship 


*33 

and  a  new  life,  private  and  social,  based  on  Faith  and  Love,  do  not 
meet  with  general  response.  Even  reformers  who  are  bravely  battling 
for  a  more  righteous  Social  System,  and  who  might  be  expected  to 
hail  a  Liberal  Religion  as  their  natural  ally,  hold  aloof  from  churches, 
either  because  they  distrust  them  or  because  they  imagine  that  all 
humanity  needs  is  a  readjustment  of  material  conditions  and  environ- 
ment. 

Nothwithstanding,  however,  much  that  is  unfavorable  to  the  growth 
of  Liberal  Religion  in  Australia,  there  is  a  leaven  of  better  things  at 
work  among  us.  We  have  earnest  and  thoughtful  men  and  women 
among  us  who  long  for  a  more  living  and  liberal  Church  as  the  Light 
of  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  guide  of  the  young  men  and  women 
who  consciously  or  unconsciously  have  broken  with  the  old  Dog- 
matic Ideal  of  Religion  and  the  Church,  and  have  risen  above  the  old 
barriers  of  contending  creeds  and  sectarianisms,  whether  "  orthodox  " 
or  "unorthodox." 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  many,  even  in  our  "orthodox" 
churches,  are  far  broader  in  their  sympathies  than  their  official 
creeds  and  trust-deeds  would  lead  us  to  believe,  although  they  are  not 
prepared  to  make  any  sacrifice  for  their  Faith.  They  are  held  back, 
perhaps  by  old  associations,  by  fear  of  revolution,  or  by  dread  of  the 
sociological  change  which  it  is  more  and  more  coming  to  be  felt  is 
involved  in  the  substitution  of  Religion  for  Dogma. 

Here  and  there  voices  are  raised  in  the  pulpit  in  support  of  what 
is  called  "  The  New  Theology,"  and  liberal  utterances  are  heard  on 
"The  Higher  Criticism."  The  fundamental  dogma  of  "God's 
Decree"  seems  to  have  melted  away  in  the  Calvinistic  reforming 
pot,  and  it  is  not  long  since  a  leading  Presbyterian  minister  in  Vic- 
toria published  a  pamphlet  urging  that  belief  in  the  Virgin-birth, 
although  held  by  himself,  should  not  be  made  obligatory  on  ministers 
or  other  office-bearers.  The  Presbyterians,  to  relieve  their  conscious- 
ness, have  passed  "  Declaratory  Acts  "  which  are  supposed  to  modify 
the  stringency  of  the  ordination  vow,  though  the  legality  of  this  may 
be  doubted,  and  the  effect  of  such  Acts  is  to  make  the  unaccepted 
dogmas  still  more  binding. 

The  foundation  dogma  of  an  everlasting  Hell  on  which  the 
dogmatic  "Scheme  of  Salvation"  hinges  no  longer  occupies  the 
place  it  did,  and  the  old  "  hell-fire "  theology  is  at  a  discount,  al- 


134 

though  the  logical  consequences  of  this  radical  change  do  not  seem 
to  be  discerned. 

There  is  good  practical  work  being  done  by  some  of  our  churches, 
and  there  is  a  growing  feeling  that  a  living  church  means  a  practical 
church,  interesting  itself  in  the  social  welfare  of  the  people.  The 
social  problem  is  discussed  in  some  of  our  pulpits,  and  always  ap- 
pears now  on  the  programme  of  our  church  assemblies  or  congresses, 
while,  in  our  many  societies  for  advancing  the  public  good,  men  and 
women  of  every  creed  and  of  no  creed  work  harmoniously  together. 

The  difficulty  is  to  unite  and  organize  the  Liberal  Religious  Life 
of  Australia,  and  so  to  make  it  more  a  power  for  good  than  it  is. 

Much,  I  think,  might  be  done  by  the  dissemination  of  healthy  re- 
ligious literature  of  a  popular  but  educational  character,  discussing 
the  religious  problems  of  to-day,  not  in  a  sectarian  or  controversial, 
but  in  a  liberal  and  catholic  spirit.  There  might  thus  be  put  within 
the  reach  of  all  the  best  and  most  assured  results  of  modern  relig- 
ious thought  and  activity.  The  people  need  to  be  instructed.  Even 
those  liberally  disposed  do  not  know  what  is  being  said  and  done  in 
the  name  of  Liberal  Religion  all  over  the  world.  Liberal  Religion 
is  thought  to  be  a  little  sectarian  affair,  having  no  higher  aim  than  to 
make  proselytes  for  a  sect. 

Liberal  thinkers  and  workers  need  to  be  drawn  together  and  to 
know  what  their  brethren  throughout  the  world  are  doing  and 
thinking. 

Could  there  not  be  a  recognized  journal  of  Liberal  Religion  for 
the  world,  contributed  to  by  Liberal  Thinkers  and  Workers  in  many 
lands,  published  in  different  languages,  and  containing  news  of  every 
liberal  church  organization  ?  It  would  need,  however,  to  be  a  journal 
popularly  and  simply  written,  suitable  for  distribution  among  con- 
gregations as  well  as  clergy. 

I  think,  further,  that  the  establishment  of  a  Permanent  Centre  of 
Liberal  Religion  may  be  necessary,  on  the  lines  of  the  "Institute  of 
Social  Service"  established  in  New  York  and  London  by  my  friend, 
Dr.  Josiah  Strong,  in  touch  with  all  the  churches  and  able  to  furnish 
counsel  and  information  to  any  seeking  aid. 

Missionaries  of  Liberal  Religion  are  sorely  wanted, — men,  and 
women,  also,  full  of  faith  and  wisdom  and  knowledge,  bearing  no 
name  but  that  of  "Liberal  Religion,"  from  whatever  section  of  the 


135 

Church  they  may  come,  lecturing  and  preaching  perhaps,  by  prefer- 
ence, in  halls  outside  of  the  churches,  on  neutral  ground. 

A  visit  from  such  apostles  of  the  "Larger  Faith"  and  the  true 
Evangel  might  do  much  to  stir  us  up  here  in  Australia,  and  to  unite 
the  many  scattered  religious  "  Liberals"  to  be  found  within  and  with- 
out the  Commonwealth. 

Surely,  it  might  be  possible  to  raise  a  fund  to  defray  the  travelling 
expenses  of  such  missionaries.  It  is  the  living  voice  we  want  to  in- 
spire us,  and  not  merely  the  written  word. 


136 


LIBERAL    RELIGION    IN    NEW    ZEALAND. 

BY  MISS  MARY  E.  RICHMOND,  OF  WELLINGTON. 

I  am  greatly  obliged  to  you  for  the  very  kind  way  in  which  you 
have  responded  to  the  mention  of  the  name  of  New  Zealand.  I  am 
a  New  Zealander  born  and  bred.  I  represent  here  the  youngest 
church,  I  believe,  in  the  community  of  liberal  churches.  We  are 
only  nine  months  old.  We  have  in  New  Zealand  two  churches 
now,  the  one  in  my  city  has  been  going  for  about  nine  months,  the 
one  in  Auckland  has  been  going  five  or  six  years.  We  are  a  little 
flock,  a  very  small  band,  but  all  beginnings  are  small,  and  it  is  the 
innate  vigor  of  the  seed  rather  than  the  size  of  it  that  matters.  The 
"Mayflower ' '  was  not  a  very  large  ship,  but  since  I  have  come  to  this 
country  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  that  frail  hull  bore  across  the 
stormy  Atlantic  the  better  part  of  the  people  of  New  England. 

The  message  that  was  chosen  to  be  delivered  to  this  Congress  by 
your  three  great  speakers  on  the  opening  night  of  this  conference 
at  Symphony  Hall  is  a  message  the  power  of  which  grows  upon  our 
hearts  and  minds  as  we  advance  in  our  efforts  towards  its  practical 
realization.  And  the  first  practical  step  to  that  is,  I  believe,  that  we 
should  know  each  other.  The  press,  admirable  as  it  is,  and  stupen- 
dous as  are  its  achievements,  does  not  always  present  nations  to  each 
other  under  their  most  favorable  aspects.  Politicians  and  diplo- 
matics are  generally  concerned  with  the  difficulties  that  beset  inter- 
national relations.  Scientific  men,  absorbed  in  the  observation  and 
revelation  of  the  great  laws  of  nature,  are  concerned  with  something 
vaster  and  calmer  than  the  struggling  life  of  nations.  But  the  men 
and  women  of  liberal  religion,  who  have  faith  in  freedom  and  freedom 
in  their  faith,  as  M.  Jean  Reville  has  said,  when  they  meet  together, 
strengthen  the  old  bonds  of  human  fellowship  and  discover  and 
develop  new  ones.  On  the  great  fundamental  principles  that 
underlie  all  spiritual  life  they  think  alike  and  feel  alike.     It  is  a 


137 

happiness  and  a  privilege  to  read  a  wise  and  a  friendly  book.  It  is 
a  much  greater  happiness,  a  much  greater  privilege,  to  look  into 
friendly  faces  and  to  hold  a  friendly  hand.  It  is  through,  I  believe, 
the  intimate  religious  fellowship  of  members  of  this  great  free  faith 
all  the  world  over  that  the  sittings  of  the  Peace  Conference  are  going 
to  be  rendered  effective.  The  passions  of  the  people  are  going  to 
be  restrained  and  calmed,  and  the  great  pugnacious  forces  of  the 
nations  turned  toward  the  struggle  with  evil.  We  are  a  fighting 
company,  we  of  the  free  faith.  We  do  not  need  to  sit  still  and  leave 
all  things  as  they  are.  Every  speech  I  have  heard  since  I  came  to 
the  city  of  Boston  has  been  a  fighting  speech.  It  has  been  a  speech 
of  a  courageous  and  disciplined  spiritual  warrior.  One  of  the  first 
tunes  I  heard  at  the  official  reception  the  other  evening  was  "On- 
ward, Christian  Soldiers."  But  this  warfare  is  one  that,  when  it  is 
accomplished,  brings  peace  and  not  a  sword. 

In  New  Zealand  we  have  these  two  centres  of  liberal  religion  and 
activity,  one  at  Auckland  in  the  north  of  the  North  Island,  one  at 
Wellington,  the  capital  of  our  country.  Mr.  Jenney,  who  is  in 
charge  at  the  centre,  has  done  a  great  deal.  He  has  been  there  only 
five  or  six  years  but  they  have  under  his  leadership  a  fine  stone 
church,  and  he  and  his  congregation  are  a  centre  of  beneficent  activ- 
ity. In  Wellington  we  have  been  with  a  minister  of  our  own  only 
about  a  year.  Dr.  Tudor  Jones  is  already  a  power  in  the  city.  Odd 
Fellows  Hall,  where  we  meet,  will  only  hold  four  or  five  hundred 
people,  and  the  corporation  has  already  been  after  us  to  say 
they  are  afraid  of  fire  because  we  so  overcrowd  it. 

We  are  at  present  a  small  and  suspected  community.  They  do  not 
quite  know  what  we  are  going  to  do.  They  think  we  are  very  likely 
anarchists,  and  are  going  to  bring  about  a  very  disagreeable  position 
of  affairs  presently.  But  I  think,  as  soon  as  they  grow  to  know  us 
more,  they  will  fear  us  less  and  like  us  better.  We  shall  prove  our 
quality,  and  they  will  see  they  have  made  a  mistake.  We  possess 
some  distinguished  members  among  us.  One  is  the  chief  justice  of 
the  colony.     He  is  a  very  great  supporter  of  ours. 

I  bring  you  over  many  miles  of  sea  the  affectionate  greetings  of 
this  little  society  of  free  and  liberal  thinkers  and  workers.  I  assure 
you  that  all  your  proceedings  will  be  watched  by  them  with  the 
warmest  and  keenest  interest.     Dr.  Tudor  Jones,  our  highly  gifted 


138 

and  successful  minister,  is  himself  very  sorry  not  to  be  able  to  attend 
our  meetings.     I  have  no  doubt  he  will  be  preaching  about  them. 

With  you  the  problem  is  the  same  as  it  is  with  us.  We  wished 
to  learn  how  to  develop  along  with  the  love  of  freedom,  the  desire 
for  individual  emancipation,  always  prominent  in  a  new  country, 
that  still  more  elevated  and  supreme  passion,  the  passion  of  personal 
devotion  to  public  and  social  service.  I  thank  you  in  the  name  of 
the  Unitarians  of  New  Zealand  for  your  kind  thought  of  us.  I 
think  I  may  carry  to  them  a  message  of  courage  and  good  cheer, 
social,  political,  and  also  religious.  When  the  Pilgrims  landed  at 
Plymouth,  they  were  but  a  feeble  folk.  When  the  English  colonists 
sent  out  by  the  governor  and  company  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay 
came  to  New  England,  under  the  lead  of  John  Winthrop,  and  founded 
Boston  in  1630,  they  were  not  a  powerful  people.  But  now  behold 
and  see  this  great  and  enlightened  city,  this  prosperous  Common- 
wealth, this  New  World!  I  do  not  think  that  we  shall  forget,  we  in 
England's  colonies,  how  big  a  place  America  is.  Our  eyes  are  fixed 
upon  America.  One  thing  I  can  tell  them  when  I  go  back,  and  that 
is  that  the  heart  of  America  is  fully  as  large  as  the  country. 


i39 


LIBERAL    RELIGION. 

BY  PROFESSOR  GOLDWIN  SMITH,  OF  TORONTO,  CANADA. 

Robinson,  the  pastor  of  the  English  Puritans  in  Holland,  in  his 
parting  words  to  members  of  his  flock  who  were  embarking  for 
America,  bewailed  the  "condition  of  the  reformed  churches  that 
had  come  to  a  period  in  religion  and  would  go  no  further  than  the 
instruments  of  their  reformation."  He  exhorted  his  hearers  "to 
be  as  willing  to  embrace  further  light  as  that  which  they  first  re- 
ceived, and  to  remember  that  it  was  an  article  of  their  church 
covenant  that  they  should  be  ready  to  receive  whatever  truth  should 
be  made  known  to  them  from  the  written  word  of  God."  Literary 
research  and  natural  science,  though  not  "the  written  Word  of 
God,"  are  also  revelations  in  their  way,  and  from  them  new  light 
has  broken.  But  the  Protestant  Churches  still  remain  pent  in  the 
doctrinal  formularies  and  tests  of  the  seventeenth  century,  which 
in  their  time  were  perhaps  necessary,  at  all  events  naturally  adopted 
as  rallying  points  of  Protestant  union  and  bulwarks  against  Rome. 
Thus  the  religious  intellect,  especially  the  religious  intellect  of  the 
clergy,  is  paralyzed,  and  they  are  debarred  from  themselves  receiv- 
ing and  from  helping  us  to  attain  the  truth.  The  mental  position 
of  some  of  them,  especially  the  ablest  and  most  learned,  must,  one 
cannot  help  thinking,  be  irksome,  though  they  may  allay  misgiv- 
ings on  the  part  of  doctrine  in  the  thought  of  the  good  that  they 
are  doing  by  preaching  high  morality  and  leading  in  good  works. 
Great,  surely,  would  be  the  gain  to  us  if,  at  a  time  when  religion  seems 
to  be  failing  altogether,  we  could  set  the  conscience  and  intellect 
of  all  Christian  ministers  free.  Such  I  take  to  be  one  great  practi- 
cal object  of  this  Congress.  It  apparently  need  involve  no  dis- 
turbance of  church  organization,  a  useful  antidote  to  less  kindly 
organizations  in  these  contentious  days. 

Ultra-physicism  meantime  tells  us  confidently  that  since  the  dis- 


140 

covery  of  evolution  by  Darwin  religion  has  been  dead,  and  that 
a  man  is  a  fool  who  concerns  himself  with  such  questions  as  the 
immortality  of  the  soul.  The  fools  are  numerous,  for  it  appeared 
that  the  editor  of  a  London  journal  had  received  in  the  course  of  a 
few  months  no  less  than  nine  thousand  letters  of  religious  inquiry. 
The  rich  man  may  be  satisfied  with  the  enjoyments  of  this  life, 
and  "jump  the  life  to  come."  But  even  he,  if  he  is  disposed  to 
laugh  at  religious  inquirers,  might  remember  that  the  foundations 
of  Christian  society  have  been  religious.  The  many  have  been 
largely  reconciled  to  their  lot  by  the  belief  that  it  was  a  divine  ordi- 
nance, and  that  for  those  who  did  their  duty,  if  their  lot  was  hard 
here,  there  would  be  compensation  hereafter.  The  impression 
may  not  have  been  very  clear,  but  it  has  been  present  and  effective. 
To  replace  it  in  the  minds  of  the  masses  by  political  and  economical 
science  would  take  time. 

A  grand  discovery,  like  that  of  Darwin,  is  apt  to  carry  us  away. 
It  was  said  that  Harvey's  discovery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood 
set  physiologists  explaining  everything  by  hydrostatics.  Darwin, 
like  Newton  before  him,  hypotheses  non  finxit.  He  eschewed  hy- 
pothesis and  confined  himself  to  observed  facts.  He  does  not  pre- 
tend to  tell  us  what  set  evolution  going  or  towards  what  it  is  moving. 
It  is  not  an  intelligent  power,  but  a  force  which  cannot  have  called 
itself  into  existence.  Whether  it  prevails  throughout  the  universe 
we  cannot  tell.  It  is  distinctly  physical,  while  there  are  parts  of 
human  nature  which  at  all  events  are  not  manifestly  physical,  and 
which  hitherto  evolution  has  not  explained.  Nor  as  yet  in  all 
these  thousands  of  years  has  there  a  case  been  observed  of  natural 
evolution.  Breeds  of  animals  have  been  changed  by  human  agency 
or  by  change  of  food  or  climate.  The  ape  has  got  no  nearer  to 
man.  Rudimentary  similarities  between  the  ape  and  man  seem 
hardly  enough  to  prove  evolution.  Nothing,  in  short,  seems  yet 
to  forbid  our  believing  what  the  spiritual  part  of  our  nature,  as  we 
have  hitherto  deemed  it,  tells  us,  that  there  is  a  soul  as  well  as  a 
force  in  the  universe;  and,  if  there  is  a  soul  in  the  universe,  there  is 
foundation  for  a  Liberal  Religion. 


I4I 


THIRD   GENERAL   SESSION   OF  THE   INTER- 
NATIONAL  CONGRESS. 

Held  in  Tremont  Temple  at  10  a.m.,  Wednesday,  September  25, 
President  Eliot  in  the  chair. 

A  religious  service  was  conducted  by  Rev.  Charles  Peach,  of  Lon- 
don, consisting  of  Scripture  reading,  prayer,  and  a  hymn  written  for 
the  occasion  by  Rev.  Benjamin  R.  Bulkeley. 

From  many  lands,  afar  and  near, 

We  come,  O  God,  to  sing  Thy  praise, 
The  Sacred  Presence  to  revere, 

The  anthem  of  the  truth  to  raise. 

That  truth  in  differing  phrase  is  taught, 

As,  gathered  under  various  skies, 
The  seekers  after  Thee  have  caught 

The  messages  of  paradise. 

May  myriad  voices  still  proclaim 

The  word  which  sets  Thy  children  free, 
Uniting  creeds  of  every  name 

To  seek  Thy  glorious  liberty. 

Come,  Pentecostal  Spirit,  come, 

Touch  prayer  and  utterance  with  Thy  flame, 

That  every  heart  may  feel  at  home, 
And  catch  the  accents  of  Thy  name. 

The  President. — It  was  a  great  pleasure  to  some  of  us  a  few  years 
ago  to  welcome  one  of  the  bravest  soldiers  of  religious  freedom  that 
we  know,  one  who  has  suffered  more  for  this  cause  than  almost  any 
one  of  us  here.  He  told  us  the  remarkable  story  of  the  struggles  for 
religious  freedom  in  his  native  Bohemia,  and  I  will  ask  you  again 
to-day  to  greet  Professor  Masaryk,  of  the  University  of  Prague. 


142 


THE  RELIGIOUS  SITUATION  IN  AUSTRIA- 
BOHEMIA. 

BY  PROFESSOR  T.  G.  MASARYK,  UNIVERSITY  OF  PRAGUE,  BOHEMIA. 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — Almost  all  the  addresses  you  have  heard 
here  and  you  will  hear  are  given  by  clergymen.  I  am  a  layman,  per- 
haps I  am  a  Philistine,  so  to  say.  Therefore  do  not  expect  from  me  a 
theological  statement.  Do  not  expect  statistics  on  our  religious  life 
in  Austria  and  Bohemia,  figures  showing  the  attendance  in  churches, 
and  other  such  very  valuable,  but,  for  my  purpose,  not  necessary 
information.  To  me  the  religious  situation  in  Austria  and  Bohemia 
is  the  situation  of  our  souls, — the  situation  not  outwardly,  but  how 
it  looks  from  within. 

You  must  remember  that  Austria  is  a  Catholic  country,  and  you 
must  allow  me  to  tell  you  what  Catholicism  means.  If  we  do  not 
know  what  Catholicism  means,  we  will  not  understand  the  religious 
situation  of  a  Catholic  country.  Catholicism  evermore  means 
church-religion.  A  Catholic  is  apt  to  think  that  only  his  Church  has 
religion,  and  that  outside  of  the  Church  there  is  no  religion  at  all. 
Church  means  an  organization,  it  means  priests,  the  hierarchy,  the 
Pope,  a  great,  grand  centralization.  Church  means  the  dualism  of 
priests  and  laymen:  the  priest  is  the  intermediator  between  God  and 
the  soul.  Where  there  are  priests,  priests  in  the  real  sense  of  the  word, 
there  are  two  moralities, — a  morality  of  two  different  kinds.  The 
priest  has  his  own,  the  layman  has  his  own, — it  is  the  difference  be- 
tween celibacy  and  family  life.  In  Catholicism,  therefore,  there  is 
a  wide  difference  between  good  and  holy:  it  is  one  thing  to  be  good, 
something  quite  different  to  consider  anything  as  holy.  The  Cath- 
olic gives  a  great  preponderance  to  ceremonials,  and  ceremonials 
are  to  him  not  only  an  expression,  perhaps  an  aesthetic  expression  of 
religious  feeling  and  life;  not  ritual  only,  but  a  miraculous  transac- 
tion.    And  so  is  his  prayer.     To  use  the  words   of   the  Russian 


143 

writer  and  thinker,  Turgeneff,  who  expresses  the  Catholic's  think- 
ing and  feeling  about  prayer,  that  God  might  make  two  times  two 
five;   might  work  a  miracle,  a  personal  miracle,  for  him. 

Finally,  Catholicism  means  that  religion  is  belief,  and  only  belief. 
If  you  fully  grasp  the  meaning  of  this  explanation,  you  will  under- 
stand what  Catholic  Austria  means.  Austria  is  the  land  of  anti- 
reformation,  Austria  is  the  land  that  crushed  the  Reformation,  and, 
in  the  first  place,  she  crushed  our  Bohemian  Reformation,  using  all 
her  governmental  power  to  do  this.  And  so  in  Austria  you  find  the 
typical  instance  of  a  truly  Catholic  country,  and  that  means,  in  fine, 
that  a  Catholic  country  is  a  theocracy.  The  Church  and  the  State 
are  one:  that  means  theocracy.  Catholicism,  theocratic  Catholicism, 
means  a  religious  aristocracy,  and,  where  there  are  religious  aris- 
tocrats,— the  hierarchy, — there  are  religious  slaves.  That  spells 
Catholicism. 

As  in  all  countries,  we  have  a  struggle,  we  have  a  conflict,  between 
free  thinking  and  the  theocratic  regime:  it  is  the  antagonism  and 
contrast,  a  contradictory  contrast,  between  ecclesiastical  theology 
and  philosophy  and  science.  You  will  observe  that  in  Catholic 
countries  this  conflict  is  more  radical  than  in  Protestant  countries. 
It  is  because  the  Church  imbues  the  Catholic  with  the  notion  that  his 
Church  is  the  only  saving  Church,  and,  if  there  is  to  be  any  religion, 
it  can  only  be  Catholicism,  even  if  it  is  untrue.  The  Catholic  may 
not  believe  any  longer,  but  he  cannot  conceive  of  any  other  religion 
than  Catholicism.  The  organization  of  the  Church  and  her  ceremo- 
nials take  possession,  so  to  say,  of  his  imagination.  "Catholic  imag- 
ination" is  a  well-known  expression.  The  Catholic  may  get  rid  of 
all  the  dogmas,  he  may  not  believe  anything,  yet  in  his  heart  he  has 
not  overcome  Catholicism.  And  so  you  will  find  that  such  Catholics 
will  fear  their  Church,  and  this  their  fear  is  a  kind  of  hatred:  they  hate 
the  Church.  The  most  violent  expression  of  this  Catholic  attitude 
of  mind  the  greatest  Bohemian  poet,  Mr.  Makgar,  has  given  in  a 
much  spoken  of  book,  "The  Poison  of  Judea."  It  is  natural  that 
the  negation  of  Catholicism  by  a  Catholic  in  its  most  radical  form 
should  come  from  our  nation,  the  nation  of  John  Huss,  of  Peter 
Kheltchitsky,  the  founder  of  Unitas  Fratrum  (the  United  Brethren), 
the  nation  of  Comenius.  I  say,  our  people,  as  soon  as  they  come  to 
.know  of  John  Huss  and  of  the  Bohemian  Reformation,  needs  must 


144 

come  in  conflict  with  the  official  Church,  and  then  this  peculiar  fear 
and  hatred  develops  in  our  souls.  The  warfare  between  the  Church 
and  a  people  thinking  freely  on  Church  and  religion  causes  a  kind 
of  religious  anarchy.  And  it  is  just  a  religious  anarchy  which  char- 
acterizes Austria-Bohemia,  and  I  would  say  all  Catholic  countries. 
This  longlasting  war  hurts  both  belligerent  parties.  First,  the 
continuous  criticism,  this  polemics,  this  negation  of  the  Church, 
produces  a  peculiar  state  of  mind,  a  state  of  polemical  bitterness; 
but,  if  you  watch  and  observe  these  people  who  criticise  their  Church, 
and  who  in  their  negation  often  exceed  all  bounds,  you  will  find  that 
they  yet  live  on  their  hated  Church.  There  are  more  people  who 
live  on  other  men's  conscience  than  is  generally  admitted.  Next, 
it  is  the  doubt,  the  scepticism,  which  pervades  the  country;  and 
there  are  different  forms  and  degrees  of  the  disquieting  scepticism. 
Then  you  find  a  great  deal  of  indifferentism:  it  is  the  worst  thing 
you  can  find  in  any  soul,  if  a  man  cares  no  more  for  spiritual  and 
religious  life.  Indifferentism  is  the  real  unbelief.  Finally,  you  will 
find  men  and  women  and  children  without  any  religion  at  all.  I 
must  confess  to  myself  that  until  now  it  has  been  a  great  puzzle  how 
that  can  be;  but  I  must  acknowledge  the  fact, — there  are  people 
without  religion,  as  there  are  people  without  science,  without 
art. 

If  I  criticise  this  situation,  and  try  to  show  it  as  it  really  is,  and  if 
I  criticise  in  this  way  the  Church,  I  am  not  so  opposed  to  the  theology 
of  the  Church,  to  its  theory:  my  criticism  applies  to  the  moral  in- 
fluence of  Catholicism  and  the  Church.  Positively  and  negatively, 
(by  its  deficiency),  the  Church  is  unable  to  remove  the  existing  relig- 
ious anarchy:  the  Church  is  unable  to  remove  the  moral  anarchy 
proceeding  from  the  religious.  This  two-fold  anarchy  leads  to  very 
sad  ends.  If  you  look  at  the  figures  giving  you  the  number  of  sui- 
cides in  the  different  Catholic  countries  (of  course,  in  Protestant 
countries  as  well),  you  will  find  that  in  the  civilized  countries  of 
Europe,  to  give  a  round  number,  every  year,  year  by  year,  at  least 
70,000  persons  kill  themselves;  and  know  further  that  there  are 
at  least  2,000  children  who  commit  suicide.  This  suicidal  mania 
directly  and  indirectly  proceeds  from  religious  and  moral  anarchy. 
The  horrible  data  of  suicide  impugn  the  state  of  religious  life  in 
Austria,  in  Bohemia,  and  in  all  Europe.    These  are  poisoned  souls,. 


145 

as  we  say,  broken  souls  and  tired,  who  cannot  live  any  more  and 
choose  to  die.  Remember  how  the  public  in  Europe  was  shocked 
by  the  English-Boer  War,  when  some  thousands  of  people  fell, 
or  in  the  late  Japanese  and  Russian  War, — compare  with  this 
the  number  of  persons  who  leave  their  own  life  willingly.  Just 
imagine  what  that  means, — that  one  child  should  find  life  intoler- 
able and  decide  to  die!  I  am  sure  that  the  growing  proclivity  to 
commit  suicide,  that  this  modern  suicidity  (allow  me  the  word),  is 
the  religious  problem  of  Europe  and  of  our  civilized  world.  What 
is  it  that  is  going  on  among  us  that  at  least  60,000  people,  in  the 
civilized  world,  year  by  year,  leave  what  we  call  a  life  of  civilization 
and  progress  and  culture?  That  is  the  problem,  it  is  the  religious 
problem  of  all  the  problems  to  be  solved. 

At  the  same  time  as  the  suicidal  mania  a  strong  pessimistic  feel- 
ing has  developed,  as  is  seen  in  philosophy  and  literature.  In  the 
third  place,  we  must  point  to  the  growing  pathological  nervousness 
and  mental  weakness  of  our  time.  No  doubt,  the  psychical  state 
of  modern  society  is  pathological.  It  can  be  proved  that  this  state 
is  in  close  connection  with  the  decline,  decay,  and  dissolution  of  the 
official,  ecclesiastical  religion  and  organization. 

As  in  every  warfare,  the  two  parties  will  be  apt  to  find  a  com- 
promise. And  so  you  can  see  that  there  are  two  sorts  of  compro- 
mises. First,  the  theologians,  and  precisely  the  liberal  theologians, 
make  compromises,  the  Catholic  as  well  as  the  Protestant  theologians. 
On  the  other  side  are  the  compromising  men  of  science  and  phi- 
losophy. The  official  philosophy,  to  my  view,  is  nothing  else  than 
a  compromise.  So  a  kind  of  scholasticism  is  presented  on  both 
sides,  yet  more,  a  kind  of  Jesuitism  promulgated  by  theologians  and 
philosophers.  They  say  very  often:  "Yes,  the  historic  develop- 
ment, evolution,  is  very  gradual.  Evolution  excludes  revolution." 
I  believe  in  evolution,  but  I  also  believe  in  revolution,  especially 
in  the  sphere  of  spiritual  life.  Revolution  is  an  organic  evolution. 
You  must  say  "Yes"  or  "No,"  but  must  not  say  "Yes-no"  at 
once. 

I  know  people  enjoy  quiet  and  not  to  have  to  think  much,  because 
thinking  is  not  agreeable:  it  hurts,  I  am  sure  of  that.  They  will 
find  some  surrogate,  some  substitute  for  religion.  I  wish  to  point 
to  the  fact  that  different  elements  of  religious  life  are  kept  and  cher- 


146 

ished  according  to  the  different  wants  of  individuals.  Some  will 
stick  to  theology.  They  like  to  know  everything  about  the  devel- 
opment of  religion  and  the  Church:  it  often  is  a  kind  of  theology  of 
theology, — a  second-hand  theology.  There  are  many  people  who 
like  theology,  the  theological  intellectualism  displayed  in  interpre- 
tation, symbolization,  and  in  all  that  modern  "twisting"  of  the 
true  sense  of  unmistakable  words.  Of  course,  a  second  class  of 
intellectualists  are  the  philosophers  and  the  scientists.  They  even 
believe  religion  can  be  replaced  by  philosophy  and  science.  You 
often  will  hear  that  in  our  country.  Of  course,  if  you  ask,  "How 
can  chemistry  or  technology  or  civil  engineering  replace  religion ?,r 
you  will  not  get  an  answer,  simply  because  religion  cannot  be  re- 
placed,— neither  by  science  nor  by  philosophy,  nor,  of  course,  by 
theology. 

Another  class  of  people  will  be  given  to  ceremonials.  They  like 
to  go  to  the  church.  They  do  not  believe  any  more,  but  they  in- 
dulge this  habit;  the  more,  as  it  belongs  to  fashion,  to  social  welfare. 
The  richer  ones  rejoice,  perhaps,  over  their  Sunday  dresses.  They 
love  all  that  belongs  to  ritualism  and  ceremonialism.  People  like  to 
get  these  sensuous  impressions  the  church  and  the  service  give. 
They  will  stick  to  them  even  if  they  are  what  they  call  themselves, — 
atheists.  They  enjoy  the  art  in  ceremonials,  the  music.  They  like 
to  hear  a  good  sermon,  and  they  will  talk  much  about  the  sermon, — 
not  what  they  heard,  but  how  the  man  spoke.  Religious  literature, 
especially  romances  and  novels,  is  now  in  vogue. 

Nowadays  you  will  find  a  good  many  of  our  people  who  will  tell 
you  that  the  Church,  in  order  to  be  saved,  must  be  socialized;  you 
will  find  theologians,  socialists,  saying,  "Jesus  was  a  reformer,  a 
social  reformer;  nay,  he  was  a  socialist."  I  do  not  believe  that.  I 
do  not  believe  in  the  socialization  of  the  Church.  I  don't  see  how 
the  priest  would  gain  by  studying  political  economy.  In  a  time 
when  we  have  State  socialism,  when  we  have  municipalism,  when  the 
State  and  the  communities  take  care  of  social  reforms,  there  is  no 
need  of  socializing  the  Church.  But  there  is  a  great  want  of  religion 
in  the  Church.  Other  good  people  would  try  to  replace  religion  by 
morality,  and  strive  for  a  better  life.  They  forget  that  morals  are 
not  religion,  that  religion  is  something  besides  morality.  This  is 
granted  by  many;  but  they  seek  for  religion  in  mysticism,  they  see 


147 

the  true  religious  life  in  mystics  and  mysteries.  Often  these 
mystics  abide  by  sentimentalism  and  romanticism. 

Finally,  the  majority  of  our  people  accept  simply  the  organization 
of  the  Church.  It  is  the  ecclesiasticism  of  the  State  Church — in  one 
word,  politics,  theocratic  politics — which  replace  for  them  religion. 
From  these  people  you  will  hear, "The  people  must  have  religion." 
I  often  hear  it  and  read  it  in  every  speech  from  the  throne  of  em- 
perors and  kings,  that  the  people  need  religion.  And  I  hear  it  as 
often  from  the  clergy,  from  the  priests.  "No,  sir,"  I  am  moved  to 
say,  "you  must  have  religion." 

Of  course,  I  know  quite  well  that  the  adherents  of  ecclesiasticism, 
that  people  who  blindly  believe  the  pastor,  are  apt  and  able  to  be- 
lieve as  blindly  the  emperor  and  his  officials.  I  understand  that 
quite  well.     But  that  is  politics,  and  not  religion. 

One  explicit  word  about  the  religious  life  in  the  Church,  in  the 
State  Church.  In  this  Church  of  aristocracy  and  government,  of 
plutocracy  and  capitalism,  to  say  it  in  one  word,  the  greatest  atten- 
tion is  given  to  the  maintenance  of  order.  You  must  be  an  orderly 
man,  as  they  call  it,  that  is  all.  You  must  be  and  stay  matriculated 
in  the  church  register,  then  you  must  manifest  your  formal  adher- 
ence to  the  Church,  but  the  Church  and  the  State  do  not  care  for  your 
moral  and  religious  life.  The  adherence  to  the  Church  is  a  question 
of  show,  not  of  religiosity.  No  doubt  that  church-going  and  partici- 
pation in  church  formalities  teach  a  man  a  kind  of  order:  it  edu- 
cates him  in  some  sort.  But  that  is  not  religion.  The  Church  cares 
to  be  seen.  We  have  magnificent  churches  in  our  country:  they 
take  care  of  every  little  church  to  embellish  it,  and  to  have  it  just 
as  handsome  as  possible.  The  churches  are  erected  in  conspicuous 
places.  But  is  that  religion  ?  If  you  walk  some  steps  from  that 
church,  you  will  find  a  tenement  house,  and  there  live  eighteen, 
twenty,  even  more  than  twenty  persons,  in  one  little  room.  Why, 
what  is  the  good  of  all  these  churches  and  the  whole  church  show,  if 
you  find  that  awful  social  negligence  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
church  ? 

This  official  Catholicism  does  not  care  any  more  for  souls.  I  was 
born  a  Catholic,  and  I  experienced  myself  all  these  struggles  of  the 
soul.  The  official  Catholicism  looks  to  me  like  a  general  or  public 
hospital  where  the  doctor  should  prescribe  one  medicine  for  all  the 


148 

patients.  No,  such  a  Church  cannot  give  what  the  people  and  what 
we  Philistines  need  and  want.  The  church  trustees,  the  government, 
the  police,  not  even  a  night-watch,  is  appointed  if  he  is  not  a  member 
of  the  State  Church.  And  of  course  you  must  expect  that  the  official 
Church,  aided  by  the  police,  by  the  State,  will  persecute  free  thought, 
even  at  our  universities.  The  clericals  are  striving  to  have  a  Cath- 
olic university,  and,  above  all,  they  would  like  to  get  the  teachers  and 
professors  in  the  public  schools  and  in  the  middle  schools,  as  we  call 
them,  to  place  the  youth  in  their  hands. 

I  know  there  are  good  Catholic  priests,  theologians,  nice,  gentle 
people.  I  like  them  myself,  although  I  do  not  like  what  they  hold. 
These  people,  who  call  themselves  liberal  Catholics,  strive  for  a  kind 
of  "Reforming  Catholicism,"  "Neo-Catholicism,"  "Modernism," 
"Americanism,"  and  so  on.  They  believe  in  a  reformation  in  their 
Church,  and  try  to  make  it.  I  do  not  believe  in  these  attempts,  and 
I  cannot  believe  in  them,  because  all  the  reforms  they  propose  are 
petty  and  trifling  in  proportion  to  what  is  going  on  in  Catholic  souls. 
I  will  give  you  an  instance  of  such  a  Catholic  reformer,  Professor 
Scheicher.  I  take  him  as  a  symptomatic  instance.  He  is  professor 
of  Christian  ethics,  and  he  was  deputy  in  our  Reichstag,  in  the  Par- 
liament of  Vienna, — a  man,  therefore,  who  knows  well  his  Church, 
and  who  is  well  acquainted  with  the  actual  relation  of  the  Church 
and  the  State.  Mr.  Scheicher  is  not  a  liberal  in  the  sense  in  which 
you  would  understand  the  word.  I  remember  he  edited  a  Spanish 
book,  and  he  himself  believes  with  its  Spanish  author  that  liberalism 
is  a  sin,  and  a  mortal  sin.  And  yet  this  man  had  finally  to  confess 
that  the  Church  and  the  State  of  Austria  are  on  the  verge  of  a  catas- 
trophe. And  how,  with  what  means,  would  he  try  to  save  his  Church  ? 
He  recommends  to  his  Church  the  separation  of  the  State,  the  liberty 
of  the  Church  and  the  liberty  of  the  State.  He  recommends  the 
abolition  of  celibacy,  the  replacing  of  the  Latin  in  the  church  ser- 
vice by  the  vernacular,  and  hints  at  some  forms  of  superstition  in 
the  Church  which  are  intolerable.  No  doubt  the  separation  of  the 
Church  and  State  is  a  valuable  condition  for  the  development  of  a 
truer  life  in  the  Church.  I  can  appreciate  the  other  propositions,  but, 
on  the  whole,  all  these  means  are  no  longer  sufficient.  But  the  ex- 
perience we  have  in  our  country,  in  France,  in  Germany,  every- 
where, with  Neo-Catholicism  and  Neo-Catholics  proves  that  refor- 


REV.  GEORGE  A.  GORDON,  D.D. 

Boston,  Mass. 


REV.  FREDERICK  A.  BISBEE,  D.D 
Boston,  Mass. 


REV.  CHARLES  W.  WENDTE 
Secretary  of  the  Congress 


EDWIN  D.  MEAD,  Esq. 
Boston,  Mass. 


He  * 

s/Tv 


"ornial 


149 

mation  in  the  Roman  Church  is  impossible.  Just  now  Pius  X.,  the 
pope,  has  published  his  syllabus,  as  you  know,  and  some  days  ago  a 
new  encyclical  was  promulgated  in  which  he  forbids  every  reform. 

Our  situation  in  Austria,  in  Bohemia,  in  all  the  Catholic  countries 
of  Europe,  tends  to  this,  which  I  will  express  by  a  word  not  quite  Eng- 
lish,— "unchurch."  We  must  unchurch  all  our  life.  I  mean  we 
must  separate  from  the  Church  entirely  not  only  science,  philosophy, 
and  art, — that  is  already  done, — but  we  must  separate  from  the 
Church  all  politics,  and,  above  all,  our  morals  and  our  religion  itself. 
Religion  must  be  separated  from  the  Church,  and  I  am  sure  from  all 
the  churches.  We  must  overcome  Catholicism  inwardly,  not  out- 
wardly. I  therefore  do  not  plead  for  a  formal  separation  from  the 
Church  only.  I  know  people  who  have  left  the  Church  formally,  but 
who  remained  Catholics  in  their  heart.  We  have  to  overcome  Ca- 
tholicism in  our  hearts. 

Part  of  the  people  of  Austria  leave  the  Catholic  Church  and  join 
Protestantism.  I  spoke  about  that  movement,  called  "Away  from 
Rome  "  about  five  years  ago.  You  know  the  fact  that  thousands  and 
thousands  left  the  Church  and  joined  Protestantism.  Unhappily,  the 
movement  is  to  a  great  extent  nationalistic  and  political:  it  is  re- 
stricted to  the  German  population.  We  Bohemians,  although  we  are 
against  Rome,  cannot  rejoice  at  it. 

Here  I  must  say  a  word  or  two  about  our  Protestantism.  You 
remember  we  have  only  2  per  cent,  of  Protestants  in  our  country. 
This  may  explain  why  our  Protestantism  is  rather  weak  and  much 
under  the  influence  of  Catholicism.  I  myself  joined  the  Protestant 
Church  thirty  years  ago,  but  I  am  a  dead  member  of  that  Church, 
because  I  find  in  Protestantism  many  fundamental  principles  of  that 
religion  which  I  left  in  Catholicism.  I  do  not  believe  that  official 
Protestantism  will  liberate  us  and  give  us  what  we  want.  I  am 
sorry  that  the  Bohemian  Protestantism  does  not  have  the  religious 
courage  to  challenge  the  nation  against  Rome  in  the  name  of  our 
Bohemian  Reformation,  in  the  name  of  Huss,  Kheltschitsky,  Co- 
menius. 

I  may  mention  that  our  two  Bohemian  Protestant  churches  (the 
Lutheran  and  the  Reformed)  have  recently  inaugurated  a  discussion 
about  a  union. 

There  are  many  people  who  leave  the  Church  without  joining  any 


i5o 

other  religious  body.  The  number  of  these  "without  confession" 
(the  Austrian  official  terminology)  is  growing  year  by  year. 

In  former  days  our  free-thinking  people  and  people  who  care  for 
religious  and  moral  life  were  not  organized,  except  as  politically  free 
and  progressive  parties.  Now  they  begin  to  be  organized.  They 
accept  the  platform  of  the  separation  of  the  Church  from  the  State 
and  of  free  schools.  Some  days  ago  in  Prague  we  had  the  Inter- 
national Congress  of  what  is  called  the  Libre  Pensee, — free  thinkers. 
It  is  the  example  of  France  which  is  felt  in  our  country.  We  love 
France  for  what  she  did,  liberating  religion  from  the  influence  of  the 
State  and  the  State  from  the  Church.  Of  course,  we  like  republican 
France  and  free-thinking  France,  not  the  Catholic  France. 

You  will  find  among  our  freer  people  and  liberal  people  some  sort 
of  materialism  and  atheism.  At  least,  many  of  them  believe  that 
they  are  materialists  and  atheists.  I  do  not  believe  it.  I  know 
atheists,  but  I  must  confess  I  have  found  very  few  of  them.  What 
they  call  materialism  and  atheism  very  often  is  a  longing  for  religion. 
And  I  am  sure  that,  if  Jesus  were  to  come  now  to  us,  he  would  most 
desire  to  meet  these  atheists  and  materialists,  because  he  knew  that 
the  healthy  need  not  a  physician,  but  the  sick.  And  we  are  sick,  no 
doubt. 

From  that  point  of  view  you  must  consider  the  striking  fact  that 
the  mass  of  our  people  accepts  more  and  more  the  materialistic, 
atheistic  socialism.  At  the  last  election  in  Austria,  when  the  general 
suffrage  was  introduced,  there  were  elected  to  the  central  parliament 
eighty-seven  socialists.  Austria  (and  Bohemia)  has  the  most  social- 
istic parliament  in  Europe. 

What  does  that  mean  ?  I  do  not  believe  that  socialism  is  only  an 
economic  question.  Socialism  gives  to  the  bulk  of  our  people  a  stand- 
ard. It  gives  them  the  yes  or  no,  a  decided  "No"  or  "Yes";  and 
we  are  sick  of  this  "Yes-no,"  as  I  told  you.  And  that  is  why  social- 
ism is  spreading  and  will  spread  among  our  people,  because  it  is  firm: 
it  gives  a  conviction  to  live  by,  and  people  must  have  a  conviction. 
The  growth  of  socialism  will  support  the  religious  development.  It 
was  Paine  who  said  that  to  get  political  freedom  helps  to  get  religious 
freedom.  That  is  true.  I  am  glad  that  socialism,  working  for  po- 
litical liberation,  is  spread  among  us,  because,  if  we  get  political  free- 
dom in  Austria,  we  will  get  religious  freedom  also.     And  I  rejoice 


i5i 

at  the  growth  of  socialism,  because  the  masses  of  our  nations  in 
Austria  must  choose  between  Catholicism  and  socialism.  The  same 
process  is  going  on  in  all  Catholic  countries. 

Concerning  the  materialism  and  atheism  of  socialism,  I  myself 
am  known  as  an  opponent  of  materialism  and  atheism;  but  the  his- 
tory of  materialism  and  atheism,  I  think,  teaches  us  that  materialism 
and  atheism  are  always  the  philosophical,  radical  weapon  against 
the  evils  and  abuses  of  ecclesiasticism,  clericalism,  and  a  church 
religion. 

I  must  conclude.  What  I  have  said  about  the  religious  situation 
in  our  country  applies,  I  dare  say,  to  all  countries  in  Europe.  It  is 
a  state  of  transition  which  we  feel.  It  is  a  state  of  halfness  we  live 
in.  Here  at  our  meetings  much  emphasis  is  laid  on  religious  liberty. 
That  is  right.  But  we  want  more  than  liberty.  We  need  a  con- 
structive, a  creative  religious  liberty.  We  not  only  must  have  re- 
ligion, we  must  have  a  higher  and  more  ennobling  religion.  That 
is  what  we  want,  and  not  to  go  back  to  what  we  had  already.  It  is 
the  fault  of  Protestantism,  for  instance,  with  us,  and  I  suppose  all 
over  Europe  and  in  this  country  as  well  that  it  merely  avoids  the 
faults  of  Catholicism.  That  is  not  enough.  And  it  is  not  enough 
if  the  so-called  free  thinker  would  avoid  the  faults  of  Protestantism. 
No,  we  will  not  be  like  the  Pharisee,  despising  the  publican.  We 
want  positive  progress  in  religion,  we  want  a  religious  life  which 
will  overcome  all  the  ecclesiastical  forms  of  religion.  This  new  re- 
ligion cannot  be  anything  else  than  an  unrevealed  religion,  but  we 
seek  for  the  unrevealed  God.  That  is  the  religious  aim  we  are  work- 
ing for.  But  our  generation  yet  and  ever  seeks  after  a  sign.  People 
believe  still  in  miracles,  and  so  they  are  in  their  hearts  Catholics,  as 
I  said.  Catholicism  does  not  mean  only  the  Catholic  Church.  You 
will  find  it  in  Protestantism,  allow  me  to  say  even  in  Unitarianism. 
The  principle  of  this  Catholicism  must  be  overcome. 

I  speak  perhaps  too  sharply  for  you,  but  I  remember  that  the  man 
who  said,  "I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  my  heart,"  also  said  that  he 
brought  a  sword.  To-day  the  religious  question  is  in  the  first  place 
a  question  of  sincerity:  we  must  say  yes  or  no,  we  must  tell  the  truth, 
be  it  acceptable  or  not  acceptable  to  others. 

Note. — This,  my  analysis  of  the  religious  situation  in  Austria  and  Bohemia, 
of  course  is  given  from  a  personal  standpoint.    Soon,  I  hope,  an  abstract  of  my 


*52 

views  will  be  published  in  English  in  Chicago.     Of  late  I  wrote  some  little 
pamphlets  in  Bohemian. 

On  suicide  I  went  into  more  details  in  my  book,  "  Der  Selbstmord  als  soziale 
Massenerscheinung  der  modernen  Civilization."  The  criticism  of  Marxism, 
especially  of  the  Marxistic  materialism  to  which  I  allude,  is  given  in  my  "  Die 
philosophischen,  und  soziologischen  Grundlagen  des  Marxismus,"  Wien,  1899. 
The  books  of  Mg.  Scheicher  mentioned  in  the  address  are  "Erlebnisse  und 
Errinerungen,"  Wien,  1907,  "Der  oesterreichische  Clerustag,"  Wien,  1903. 


The  President. — We  have  placed  upon  the  walls  of  this  room  the 
names  of  Francis  David  and  Louis  Kossuth  to  testify  to  the  debt 
which  civil  and  religious  liberty  owes  to  Hungary.  Those  ideals 
still  are  cherished  in  Hungary,  and  we  shall  hear  of  them  from  Mr. 
Jozan,  the  minister  of  the  Unitarian  church  in  Budapest. 


i53 


THE  IDEALS  OF  HUNGARY,  CIVIC,  POLITICAL, 
RELIGIOUS. 

BY  REV.   NICOLAS  JOZAN,   UNITARIAN  PASTOR  OF  BUDAPEST. 

It  is  both  a  pleasure  and  a  privilege  to  speak  on  a  subject  so  near 
and  dear  to  the  heart  of  a  patriot.  It  is  a  pleasure,  because  in  giv- 
ing you  this  paper  I  may  dwell  on  the  main  lines  of  progress  as  shown 
in  the  mirror  of  history  that  reflects  for  us  the  glory  and  the  gloom 
of  a  thousand  years.  It  is  a  privilege,  because  in  the  present  state 
of  transition  I  may,  perhaps,  put  in  a  few  earnest  words  in  defense 
of  the  Magyar  race.  Our  country  is  not  a  terra  incognita.  Hun- 
gary— as  one  of  her  story-tellers  says — is  "one  of  the  fairest  and  most 
blessed  spots  on  the  face  of  the  earth."  Her  coat-of-arms  is  made 
out  of  the  emblems  of  three  mountains  and  four  rivers  that  give  a 
definite  shape  to  the  land  and  secure  the  peace  and  prosperity  of 
the  inhabitants. 

The  nation  is  composed  of  various  nationalities;  but  the  Magyar 
race  is,  and  has  always  been,  called  upon  to  take  the  lead,  and  press 
upon  the  whole  the  imprint  of  its  culture  and  character.  Out  of  a 
population  of  twenty  millions,  50  per  cent,  belongs  to  the  historic 
race  of  the  Magyars.  Issuing  from  the  common  cradle  of  Asia  and 
seeking — as  the  last  wave  of  the  migration  of  the  peoples  of  the  earth 
— for  an  ancient  inheritance,  the  Hungarians  came  and  took  possession 
of  the  land,  and  founded  there  a  kingdom  that  has  at  times  played 
a  prominent  part  in  the  life  of  Europe,  and  still  ranks  high  in  the 
sympathy  of  the  civilized  world. 

A  nation  without  kin  in  the  surrounding  sea  of  various  races  has 
survived  the  vicissitudes  of  a  thousand  years, — a  nation  whose  means 
and  ways  were  extravagant  at  first,  but  soon  became  tempered  by 
the  statesmanship  of  its  chiefs  and  princes  who  head  a  dynasty  of 
four  hundred  years  in  the  House  of  Arpad. 

Endeared  and  blessed,  it  all  comes  back  to  me  on  the  wings  of 


154 

memory,  and  I  see  in  my  mind's  eye  the  joy  and  satisfaction  of  a 
whole  nation,  whose  representatives  assemble  on  one  of  those  days  in 
the  open  field  in  council,  in  order  to  commemorate  the  First  Na- 
tional Assembly  and  mourn  for  the  ideal  chief,  Arpad,  whose  burial- 
place  now  becomes  a  common  altar  of  self-sacrifice  and  worship. 

Besides  the  conquest  of  the  land,  there  were  three  events  of  great 
consequence  in  the  life  and  history  of  Hungary;  namely,  the  con- 
version of  the  pagan  tribes  to  Christianity  in  the  year  iooo  a.d 
under  the  paternal  sway  of  King  Stephen  I. ;  the  spread  of  the  Refor- 
mation, as  a  movement  not  only  religious,  but  also  political;  and 
the  Revolution  of  1848.  In  advancing  a  few  general  remarks  upon 
these,  may  I  anticipate  what  might  have  been  dealt  with  later  on  ? 

It  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  the  adoption  of  the  Christian  faith 
by  the  warlike  tribes  of  Hungary  was  a  wise  policy  on  the  part  of  the 
ruler.  It  was,  so  to  speak,  a  God-send,  a  providential  act  by  which 
the  Hungarians  were  brought  into  more  intimate  relations  with  their 
neighbors  and  acknowledged  by  them  as  on  an  equal  footing  with  the 
rest  of  humanity.  The  sainted  king  and  the  people  succeeded, 
because  of  it,  in  laying  a  safe  foundation  for  the  throne,  unshaken  by 
the  storms  of  nine  centuries. 

To  accomplish  this  was  by  no  means  an  easy  task,  because  the  new 
faith  had  yet  to  grapple  with  the  revival  of  pagan  tradition,  and  the 
ancient  cult  made  its  influence  felt  in  remote  places  of  the  land  for 
centuries.  But  the  faith  itself  was  not  at  all  foreign  to  the  race. 
It  was  only  the  outward  forms  and  the  means  of  communication — 
that  is,  the  Latin  language — that  aroused  the  ill-will  and  suspicion 
of  certain  groups  of  people  who  looked  upon  the  old  usages,  and 
even  the  superstitions  of  a  bygone  age,  as  the  characteristic  of  the 
nation,  the  mainstay  of  its  independence. 

As  a  result,  however,  of  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  a  great  change 
was  witnessed  in  the  life  of  the  people  organized  by  the  right  hand 
of  the  first  monarch,  which  is  still  treasured  as  an  object  of  adoration 
by  our  Roman  Catholic  brethren.  This  change  affected  the  whole 
outlook  of  the  nation.  And  the  waves  of  the  change  did  not  stir 
only  on  the  surface,  like  the  mild  ripples  of  an  inland  sea,  but  went 
deep  down  to  the  bottom  of  the  nation's  heart,  and  still  keep  it  in 
continual  vibration,  as  the  means  and  condition  of  a  healthy  and 
useful  life. 


155 

Hungary  has  written  her  name  into  the  annals  of  the  world  not  so 
much  by  a  superior  prowess  of  the  sword  as  by  the  planting  of  the 
cross  upon  her  peaks  and  spires,  and  the  fearless  defence  of  the 
same  against  desperate  odds. 

A  sense  of  unity  began  henceforth  to  pervade  the  scattered  tribes 
of  the  land,  and  gave  them  an  impulse  for  higher  things  than  mere 
adventure  and  death,  however  nobly  met  on  the  field  of  battle.  A 
sense  of  unity  gained  ground  and  found  a  majestic  symbol  in  the  crown 
of  Saint  Stephen,  which  is  even  to-day  not  only  a  relic  of  the  past,  but 
also  a  real  and  legal  expression,  and  the  proof  of  the  threefold  unity 
of  the  land,  its  people,  and  its  king.  To  be  a  member  of  the  sacred 
crown  was  once  the  highest  aspiration  and  reward  of  the  nobility, 
and  through  an  extension  of  rights  and  abolition  of  privileges  it 
has  now  become  the  glory  of  the  masses,  animated  by  the  same 
spirit  of  social  and  political  unity. 

After  centuries  and  centuries  of  the  Christian  spirit  among  us,  the 
Reformation  brought  a  new  element  into  the  spiritual  life  of  the 
nation.  The  quest  for  truth  resulted  in  a  brooding  spirit  of  strife 
and  contention ;  and,  as  the  country  itself  was  divided  into  three  parts 
according  to  their  allegiance  to  the  new  dynasty  of  the  Hapsburgs,  or 
the  national  prince  of  Transylvania,  or  the  follower  of  the  Crescent, 
which  was  destined  at  that  time  to  supplant  the  Cross  and  change 
the  face  of  the  civilized  world,  even  so  the  kingdom  of  God  ushered 
in  by  the  Prince  of  Peace  owned  the  sway  of  several  high-priests  in 
turn.  Luther  among  the  Saxons,  Calvin  among  the  Magyar  popula- 
tion of  the  Lowlands,  and  Francis  David  in  Transylvania  were 
equally  popular;  and,  had  they  been  able  to  come  to  terms  with  each 
other  on  the  basis  of  mutual  understanding,  they  might  have  totally 
paralyzed  the  arts  and  crafts  of  Rome.  But  division  and  hostility 
among  the  Protestants  themselves  proved  in  the  long  run  a  favor 
and  advantage  only  for  the  Catholic  Church.  And  yet  the  Reforma- 
tion as  a  religious  movement  gave  rise  with  us  to  a  greater  love  of 
freedom,  canonized  the  rights  of  conscience  with  full  respect  for 
one's  conviction.  And  it  was  on  these  principles  that  the  legislature 
of  1568,  at  Torda, — my  native  town, — proclaimed  liberty  of  faith  and 
worship  for  all  the  branches  of  the  Christian  Church. 

Above  all,  the  Reformation  came  to  us  at  a  time  of  national  calam- 
ity as  a  comforter,  a  paraclete,  that  turned  the  attention  of  the  peo- 


i56 

pie  from  the  sad  plight  of  our  own  making  to  a  better  future,  for  which 
the  awakening  national  consciousness  would  always  yearn.  Here  we 
see  a  process  which  is  still  going  on  in  our  midst, — a  process  in  which 
religious  and  political  freedom  blend  in  perfect  harmony,  so  that  one 
never  knows  whether  the  struggle  of  four  centuries  has  been  religious 
or  political,  pure  and  simple.  It  is  generally  both  in  equal  measure ; 
and  the  tension  on  this  or  that  side  does  not  count,  for  the  struggle 
will,  in  the  long  run,  prove  beneficial  to  both. 

I  think  I  may  safely  say  that  this  animated  struggle  reached  its 
climax  in  the  Revolution  of  1848.  That  period  is  able  still  to  supply 
the  need  of  our  soul  for  hero-worship.  That  period  is  written  in 
golden  characters  in  the  book  of  life,  and  cannot  be  effaced  from  the 
memory  of  generations  yet  to  come.  The  legislation  of  1848  acted 
on  the  principles  of  Equality,  Liberty,  and  Fraternity  that  had 
issued  victorious  from  among  the  horrors  of  the  French  Revolution 
and  the  majestic  duel  of  the  Old  and  the  New  World,  and  declared 
the  equal  rights  of  the  people  as  the  basis  of  the  Hungarian  Common- 
wealth. It  also  maintained  (as  it  was  done  in  1790-91)  that  "Hun- 
gary was  an  independent  country,  subject  to  no  other  country,  pos- 
sessing her  own  constitution  by  which  alone  she  was  to  be  governed." 

We  have  here  a  complete  list  of  achievements  due,  in  part,  to  the 
work  of  the  spirit  of  the  age  as  manifested  in  art  and  science  and 
poetry.  These  agencies  were  the  best  means  to  prepare  the  way 
for  a  modern  state  in  which  high  and  low,  rich  and  poor,  would  find 
an  open  field  and  an  equality  of  opportunity  for  gradual  develop- 
ment. 

Emancipation  of  the  peasantry  from  grievous  burdens  resting  on 
their  shoulders  and  from  a  state  of  subjection  that  was  an  outrage 
against  humanity,  freedom  of  the  press,  and  the  right  of  free  thought 
and  speech;  a  responsible  ministry  and  a  Parliament  of  two  cham- 
bers; equal  rights  and  equal  burdens;  and  full  justice  to  the  various 
nationalities  that  compose  the  population  of  the  country, — these 
were  the  main  articles  of  a  political  creed  that  soon  found  its  fulfil- 
ment in  the  measures  and  institutions  called  for  by  a  universal  need 
and  sanctioned  by  the  co-operative  work  of  legislation  and  the  king. 
And  it  was  with  a  view  to  upholding  these  great  achievements  against 
internal  strife  and  the  caprice  of  Austria  that  the  war  of  indepen- 
dence was  fought  with  so  much  heroism.  And,  although  it  turned  out 


157 

a  tragedy  in  which  the  nation  was  destined  to  fail,  yet  truth  and 
liberty  were  to  emerge  victorious  after  all. 

Truth  and  liberty!  Let  us  pause  for  a  moment  at  these  great  ideas. 
Truth  is  blind  without  an  eye  to  grasp  and  compass  it.  And  liberty 
is  void  without  a  voice  to  waft  it  on  the  upper  air.  Truth  is  the  ob- 
ject of  prophetic  vision,  and  liberty  is  the  means  of  publishing  it  to 
the  world. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  last  century,  Hungary  had  a  number  of 
thinkers  and  workers  who  far  surpassed  the  ordinary  type  of  politician, 
and  entered  the  arena  of  public  life  with  heart  and  head  devoted  to 
the  holy  cause.  Szechenyi,  Deak,  and  Kossuth  were  each  men  of 
great  ability,  and  their  word  and  work  will  never  be  obliterated 
from  the  national  consciousness.  Their  names  are  household  words 
with  us,  much  as  Washington,  Franklin,  and  Adams  are  with  you. 
Patriots  all  of  them, — true  to  themselves  and  true  to  the  end.  What 
greater  virtue  could  be  recorded  in  the  annals  of  a  nation?  And 
yet  the  lines  of  action  adopted  by  these  leaders  of  men  varied  so  much 
as  to  contradict  each  other  and  increase  the  uneasiness  of  public 
opinion  in  times  of  critical  suspense. 

Count  Szechenyi,  as  a  magnate,  assigned  a  leading  part  in  the 
national  revival  to  aristocracy.  He  wanted  to  secure  a  better  future 
for  Hungary  by  promoting  her  material  and  cultural  interests,  on 
which  national  and  political  well-being  were  sure  to  follow.  And  we 
see  him  vindicate  this  position  in  the  Upper  House  of  Parliament 
by  the  living  word,  and,  in  order  to  reach  a  wider  circle,  through  the 
press ;  but  chiefly  through  the  practical  enterprises  by  which  he  strove 
to  transform  Hungary  from  a  mere  agricultural  state  into  an  indus- 
trial and  commercial  country.  The  movement  initiated  by  him  still 
holds  a  fine  prospect  for  the  future  of  Hungary.  And  we  may  quote 
a  noble  utterance  of  his:  "Do  not  constantly  trouble  yourselves  with 
the  vanished  glories  of  the  past,  but  rather  let  your  determined  pa- 
triotism bring  about  the  present  prosperity  of  the  beloved  fatherland. 
Many  there  are  who  think  that  Hungary  has  been;  but,  for  my 
part,  I  like  to  think  that  Hungary  shall  be."  It  is,  indeed,  a  prophetic 
vision  of  truth;  it  is,  indeed,  an  angelic  voice  of  liberty.  Let  us  hope 
that  it  will  never  be  darkened  or  die  on  the  air.    . 

We  all  look  up  to  Szechenyi  as  the  "greatest  of  the  sons  of  Hun- 
gary," as  Kossuth  himself  characterized  him  in  acknowledging  the 


158 

immortal  merit  of  this  master-mind, — a  leader  of  men  who  not  only 
gave  out  the  watchword,  but  took  the  first  step  in  the  long  journey- 
onward  and  upward  still  to  higher  places  of  eminence  and  aspira- 
tion. 

There  were  only  two  men  in  that  generation  to  match  him;  namely, 
Kossuth  and  Deak,  whose  word  and  work  in  the  Lower  House  of  the 
Diet  soon  made  itself  felt  and  found  its  echo  up  and  down  the  coun- 
try. Kossuth  is  the  most  popular  of  the  three,  owing  to  a  superior 
readiness  of  speech  and  that  indefatigable  energy  with  which  he 
made  the  country's  cause  his  own,  and  shrank  from  no  threat  or 
peril  that  might  endanger  his  life  in  the  glorious  service.  This  is 
but  a  poor  statement  of  the  case;  but  the  instinct  of  the  common 
people  found  a  happier  expression,  calling  him  the  "father  of  the 
land,"  even  as  Deak  is  called  the  "wise  man  of  the  land."  Both 
Kossuth  and  Deak  preached  an  evangel  which  could  not  be  taken 
amiss.  The  latter  was  prone  to  contemplation  and  fond  of  the 
adjustment  of  diverging  thoughts  and  intricate  movements;  while 
the  former  was  full  of  energy,  a  man  of  rare  qualities  developed  to 
the  utmost  efficiency,  imagination  transformed  into  action.  They 
wished  to  gain  for  Hungary  not  only  material  welfare,  but  political 
liberty  as  well.  And,  though  this  view  stood  opposed  to  Count 
Szechdnyi's  conviction,  yet  the  general  state  of  the  country,  influenced 
by  political  events  abroad,  favored  more  urgent  methods.  And  here 
we  see  the  centre  of  gravity  displaced  from  the  aristocracy  to  the 
gentry  and  the  middle  class.  And  in  the  same  way  I  suppose 
it  will  before  long  be  transmitted  to  the  laboring  classes  who,  while 
clamoring  for  panem  et  circenses,  are,  perhaps,  not  acting  on  the 
highest  principles,  but  have  to  undergo  a  severe  schooling  and  dis- 
cipline of  life. 

The  plans  and  purposes  of  a  noble-minded  monarch,  Joseph  II., 
were  thus  being  realized  through  the  agency  of  a  few  select  men, 
favored  and  supported  by  the  advancing  spirit  of  the  age.  And,  as 
a  consequence  of  this  democratic  policy,  conscience  was  free  from 
bondage;  the  various  creeds  acquired  equal  rights;  liberty  of  the 
press  kept  the  life-blood  of  the  nation  in  healthy  circulation;  and, 
above  all,  the  enslaved  peasantry  got  not  only  protection  against  their 
arbitrary  masters,  but  at  the  same  time  were  received  into  the  strong- 
hold of  the  constitution  as  an  integral  part  of  the  body  politic. 


159 

All  these  treasures,  and  more, — nay,  the  very  existence  of  the  na- 
tion,— were  at  stake  in  the  great  war  of  independence  and  the  period 
of  absolute  rule  that  followed  in  its  wake.  Shipwrecked  and  tossed 
on  the  rough  sea  of  life,  close  to  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death, 
the  nation  was  spared  the  severe  blow  of  total  extinction.  On  the 
night  of  distress  and  gloom  there  broke  a  dawn  full  of  strange  fore- 
bodings, and  the  reorganization  of  the  continuity  of  our  national 
rights  was  one  of  the  principles  on  which  the  elements  of  the  Old 
Constitution  were  renewed,  and  brought  to  bear  upon  the  constel- 
lations of  Europe. 

In  this  great  work  of  reorganization  we  are  greatly  indebted  to 
Francis  Deak,  whose  sense  of  honor  and  powerful  mastery  of  legal 
proceedings  were  both  instrumental  in  bringing  about  the  happy 
issue.  That  period  is  closely  associated  with  his  name,  and  we  can- 
not think  of  1867  and  the  treaty  of  that  date  as  a  mutual  com- 
promise of  the  Dual  Monarchy  without  a  sense  of  gratitude  to  the 
author  who  had  excelled  his  contemporaries  in  many  things,  and 
especially  in  the  simplicity  of  his  life  and  the  strength  of  his 
convictions. 

"1848"  and  "1867  "  are  still  the  war-cry  of  political  parties  that  vie 
with  each  other  in  a  doubtful  contest  for  the  upper  hand.  Lately 
they  have  come  to  terms,  and  have  joined  the  coalition  of  three  politi- 
cal parties  for  the  time  being.  It  is  an  expedient  and  a  safeguard 
against  the  unconstitutional  measures  adopted  by  an  absolute  gov- 
ernment that  had  no  ground  in  the  country  and  no  justification  in 
the  statute  books  of  the  land. 

But  the  place  and  the  occasion  permit  me  no  digression  into  the 
field  of  present-day  politics.  Neither  would  it  be  a  pleasant  task  for 
me  at  this  juncture,  when  I  have  to  sketch  before  you  the  "Ideals  of 
Hungary." 

A  nation  without  an  ideal  is  to  me  a  contradiction  in  terms.  It  is 
an  ideal  effort  and  outlook  that  transforms  the  scattered  families  and 
classes  of  a  country  into  a  homogeneous  family  of  men;  that  is,  a 
nation.  Each  nation  has  an  historical  pedigree,  and  an  historical  call 
to  fulfil;  and  the  welfare  of  the  whole  depends  in  large  measure  on 
the  loyalty  of  the  individual  members  to  the  common  ideal.  Ideals 
vary  with  successive  stages  of  a  nation's  life.  Ideals  realized  in 
practical  life  may  lose  a  great  deal  of  the  force  and  vigor  that  had 


i6o 

once  animated  them;  but  still  it  is  much  better  to  look  forward,  and 
hope  and  aspire  and  strive  for  higher  things  than  to  sink  into  the 
mire  of  despondency  and  give  up  all  hope  for  the  future.  The  latter 
part  would,  indeed,  be  suicidal  for  a  nation,  even  as  for  an  individual. 
The  life  of  the  soul  of  a  nation  is  called  upon  to  prevent  such  dis- 
mal results,  and  the  life  of  the  soul  is  also  the  "  ideal." 

The  village  or  town  that  has  a  soul  of  its  own  is  a  good  ground  in 
which  the  civic  ideal  may  strike  a  deep  root.  A  sense  of  common 
interest  is  always  sure  to  be  voiced  there  in  preference  to  self-as- 
sertion and  sordid  gains.  The  love  of  one's  native  land  is  nurtured  by 
the  beauty  of  its  natural  surroundings,  and  a  local  patriotism  is  apt 
to  develop  through  traditions  and  reminiscences  clinging  to  the  place. 
One  is  proud  of  the  growth  and  development  of  small  colonies  into 
large  emporiums  of  culture  and  commerce.  And,  though  we  have  at 
present  hardly  any  country  town  the  population  of  which  would 
exceed  100,000,  yet  the  skilled  hand  and  disciplined  mind  that 
run  the  whole  machinery  of  our  fine  metropolis,  and,  in  fact, 
that  of  the  whole  commonwealth,  are  supplied  from  such  small, 
out-of-the-way  places  as  would  hardly  rouse  the  interest  of  a  passer- 
by. We  have,  therefore,  to  go  back  to  these  first  beginnings  of 
civilization  to  be  able  to  account  for  modern  progress  with  all  the 
blessings  that  attend  its  course.  The  public  spirit  of  a  village, 
nurtured,  perhaps,  by  only  a  few  intelligent  men,  as  the  landlord, 
the  parson,  and  the  notary,  proves  a  good  school  for  the  bringing  up 
of  a  generation  of  men  and  women  who  interest  themselves  not  only 
in  their  own  advantage,  but  also  begin  to  feel  that  they  are  members 
of  a  great  family.  It  is  also  a  vantage-ground  and  a  preparation  for 
a  more  complete  administration  of  district  and  county. 

None  of  our  villages  or  towns  shrinks  from  duties  and  obligations 
that  are  imposed  by  the  institution  of  general  education.  And, 
although  of  late  the  government  itself  brings  great  sacrifices  in 
planting  new  schools  and  supporting  old  ones,  yet  the  cause  of 
education  is,  as  it  has  always  been,  of  great  moment  with  our 
parishes  and  town  corporations. 

These  small  dots  on  the  map  of  Hungary  keep  the  political  ideal 
pure  amid  party  strife  and  faction  and  colliding  interests.  All 
honor  to  them  for  the  mother-tongue  kept  unspotted  from  the  world; 
for  the  music  and  harmony  of  national  tunes  in  which  the  simple 


i6i 

shepherds  of  the  field  are  the  greatest  masters!  A  civic  responsi- 
bility is  also  testified  to  among  us  by  care  of  the  poor  and  distressed, 
by  the  nursing  of  invalids  in  homes  and  hospitals,  and  by  societies 
founded  for  the  prevention  of  crime  and  cruelty. 

I  might  just  mention,  in  passing,  that  groups  of  various  nationalities, 
where  they  are  in  a  majority,  use  their  own  language  in  the  delibera- 
tions and  the  minute  books  of  the  parish  and  the  county,  and  enjoy 
every  advantage  in  their  schools  and  churches,  provided  the  integrity 
of  Hungary  as  a  Magyar  State  be  not  jeopardized  by  their  ascend- 
ency and  fanaticism.  I  feel  sure  that  but  for  a  few  windy  agitators 
we  might  live  and  thrive  in  complete  harmony  with  our  brethren  of 
the  Saxon,  Slavonic,  and  Roumanian  stock. 

There  are  many  things  yet  to  be  desired  in  this  connection,  but 
the  ideal  never  faileth.  A  citizen  with  us  is  a  stanch  patriot,  but 
at  the  same  time  he  is  also  a  citizen  of  the  world. 

As  to  the  political  ideal  of  Hungary,  may  I  allude  to  what  I  have 
already  said  on  this  head,  in  order  to  avoid  repeating  myself? 
The  present  constitution  of  Hungary  is  one  of  the  most  liberal  in 
Europe.  Government  is  based  on  popular  representation,  as  a  prel- 
ude to  universal  suffrage,  which  is  just  pushing  on  amid  the  fer- 
mentation of  public  life.  Legal  power  is  vested  in  both  Houses  and 
the  king.  There  is  a  responsible  ministry  of  eighty-nine  depart- 
ments. And  there  is  a  delegation  of  sixty  from  each  Parliament 
to  manage  the  affairs  we  have  in  common  with  Austria;  namely, 
army,  finance,  and  foreign  affairs.  This  adjustment  gives  the  country 
an  assurance  of  standing  peace,  and  adds  to  the  equilibrium  of  Europe 
and  the  fair  name  and  fame  of  our  king,  who  is  at  the  same  time 
Emperor  of  Austria.  This  I  say  without  any  misgiving  on  my  own 
part  or  those  of  the  same  conviction,  because  we  have  learned  through 
experience,  and  also  from  the  legacy  of  Louis  Kossuth,  that  politics 
is  a  science  of  exigencies.  Here  we  may  not  follow  the  blind  instinct 
of  the  blood,  but  have  to  exercise  patient  endurance  and  wise  circum- 
spection. Without  these  qualities  of  a  diplomatic  nature  we  might 
harangue  the  masses  and  rouse  to  riot  the  discordant  spirit  of  the 
hour,  but  cannot  build  the  ideal  city  of  God  in  which  peace  and 
plenty  and  righteousness  abide. 

The  groundwork  to  this  high-minded  policy  was  laid  down  in  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction  of  1723,  in  which  Hungary  and  Austria  were 


l62 

declared  inseparable  and  under  the  sway  of  the  same  ruler  from  the 
Hapsburg  dynasty.  And  I  need  hardly  add  that  this  solution  did 
not  in  the  least  touch  the  independence  of  Hungary  as  a  separate 
kingdom  governed  by  her  own  laws.  Independence!  That's  the 
word.  And  that  is  also  the  political  ideal  of  Hungary.  And,  though 
it  had  from  time  to  time  to  be  reasserted  against  the  machinations 
of  the  Court  of  Vienna  or  the  overbearing  attitude  of  the  aristocrats 
of  the  land,  yet  I  know  no  other  word  round  which  the  whole  con- 
sensus of  the  people  would  rally  in  a  crisis.  We  prize  independence 
as  the  corner-stone  of  our  constitution.  Nothing  shows  better  our 
appreciation  of  a  free  and  democratic  constitution  than  the  fact 
that  at  the  Treaty  of  1867  one  of  the  first  conditions  of  any  com- 
promise between  the  nation  and  the  king  was  the  granting  of  the  same 
constitution  to  the  other  part  of  the  monarchy  hitherto  oppressed 
through  a  despotic  government.  Like  unto  like!  And  yet,  as  it  is 
only  too  obvious,  Hungary  and  Austria  are  only  half-sisters,  having 
a  common  father  in  the  person  of  the  monarch,  but  clinging  with  a 
natural  predilection  to  the  mother. 

Race,  temperament,  surroundings,  tradition,  and  the  competi- 
tive spirit  of  modern  times,  all  tell  heavily  upon  this  mutual  relation- 
ship, which  is,  in  part,  subject  to  revision  every  ten  years.  And  it 
takes  a  good  deal  of  time  and  energy  to  bring  about  a  common  under- 
standing then  and  there,  where  moral  and  material  interests  are  so 
multifarious  as  in  our  so-called  Dual  Monarchy. 

There  are  many  things  yet  to  be  desired  in  this  connection,  but 
the  ideal  never  faileth.  We  need  not  brood  over  the  past,  but  turn  to 
the  future  with  opening  vistas  of  hard  struggle  and  achievement,  of 
mutual  usefulness  and  general  welfare,  and  amicable  relation  with 
all  the  nations  of  the  world. 

It  is  a  full  programme,  as  you  see,  of  life  and  work  which,  I  ex- 
pect, all  the  branches  of  socialistic  propaganda  would  own  and  make 
a  part  of  their  system.  It  is  evident  that  there  is  only  one  remedy 
against  the  evil  effects  of  a  far-fetched  socialistic  agitation,  and  that 
Is  a  decided  wish  and  step  forward  on  the  part  of  both  the  State  and 
the  individual  to  anticipate  its  hopes  and  promises. 

To  combat  these  socialistic  tendencies  demands  a  deep-seated  and 
earnest  religious  life,  which  is  gaining  ground  year  by  year  among 
the  various  creeds  and  denominations  of  the  land.     The  churches 


163 

seem  to  have  awakened  to  a  fresh  sense  of  duty;  and  it  is  evident  that 
a  reiteration  of  creeds  and  articles,  however  sincere,  will  not  serve  the 
purpose.  And,  besides,  no  church  is  entitled  to  lull  its  adherents  into 
a  magnetic  sleep  by  old  customs  and  ceremonies,  but  a  true  Christian 
warfare  is  to  be  continued  against  all  the  enemies  of  the  moral  and 
religious  life  of  the  community.  Fresh  light  begins  to  dawn  and  pour 
in  from  secret  places  of  the  earth;  and  the  country  that  has  always 
been  open  to  influences  from  abroad  receives  the  achievements  of 
modern  scientific  investigation  with  great  interest.  Old  boundaries 
of  thought  and  fellowship  are  widened;  and  the  common  task  invites 
the  united  effort  of  all  the  leaders  and  servants  of  church  organiza- 
tion. 

There  is  a  widespread  conviction  among  all  the  classes  of  society 
that  something  of  great  moment  is  sure  to  come  to  pass  in  the  spirit- 
ual world.  We  witness  day  by  day  the  springing  up  beside  the 
historic  churches  of  certain  sects  and  societies  that  go  in  for  a  spirit- 
istic or  occult  knowledge  of  God,  or  as  individual  dreamers  create 
a  system  of  their  own.  The  whole  of  our  religious  and  moral  life 
evinces  a  noble  discontent  against  antiquated  forms  of  belief,  and 
earnest  workers  lend  a  helping  hand  in  the  regeneration  of  ecclesi- 
astical polity. 

Ours  is  by  no  means  a  dark  corner  of  the  world.  Missionary  enter- 
prise flourishes.  And,  if  our  means  do  not  allow  us  to  bring  a  sacri- 
fice for  foreign  missions,  we  try  to  give  heart  and  soul  to  a  home  mis- 
sion, the  blessings  of  which  are  sure  to  tell  on  the  life  and  work  of 
coming  generations.  There  seems  to  prevail  a  strong  and  healthy 
earnestness  at  the  back  of  all  these  movements,  vying  with  each 
other  for  leadership  in  the  spiritual  world. 

There  is  a  constant  agitation  going  on  through  the  living  word  and 
the  press;  and  the  object  of  this  literary  exercise  is  to  reach  those 
elements  of  society  that  have  nothing  in  common  with  their  mother 
church  except  a  loose  membership  and  the  columns  of  statistics. 

Various  branches  of  the  Roman  Catholic  body  that  forms  two- 
thirds  of  the  population,  and  the  Protestants  with  one-third  of  the 
census,  make  up  the  kingdom  of  God  with  us.  Unitarians  are  only 
a  younger  brother  in  this  populous  family  of  religions,  a  small  band 
of  the  faithful  sons  of  the  Father  of  Light.  Weak  and  poor  though 
they  be  in  comparison  with  the  dominant  churches  of  the  land,  yet 


164 

their  influence  is  felt  in  ever-widening  circles,  and  the  principles 
of  their  religious  belief  and  their  system  of  morals  are  adopted  and 
applied  as  the  groundwork  of  scientific  men.* 

There  may  be  many  things  yet  to  be  desired,  but  the  ideal  never 
faileth.  And  the  ideal  is  the  gospel  of  Christ,  a  living  church,  a 
life  of  faith  and  service,  and  rest  of  the  immortal  soul  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father. 

The  ideals  of  Hungary  are  those  of  the  rest  of  the  modern  world. 
Loyalty,  independence,  and  freedom!    What  else  do  we  need? 

Dynasties  may  come  and  go.  One  generation  may  give  birth  to 
another;  but  the  life-blood  of  the  Magyar  nation  is  sure  to  flow 
through  the  veins  of  aspiring  humanity  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
Eljen  a  Hazal 

The  President. — I  am  bursting  with  desire  to  pay  tribute  to  Hol- 
land and  tell  of  the  debt  we  in  Massachusetts,  in  particular,  owe  to 
those  who  sheltered  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  but  I  must  practise  the  brev- 
ity that  I  commend  to  others.  Let  me,  then,  only  say  that  Professor 
Groenewegen  will  now  tell  us  of  the  religious  situation  in  Holland. 

*  In  this  connection  may  be  cited  the  statement  made  by  Louis  Kossuth  to  the  late  Professor 
John  Kovacs,  and  with  the  speaker's  consent  written  down  at  the  time:  "Unitarianism  is  the 
only  faith  which  has  a  future  ;  the  only  one  that  can  influence  the  intelligent  and  interest  the 
indifferent."  Editor. 


i65 


CONDITIONS  AND  OUTLOOK   OF   LIBERAL 
RELIGIONS  IN  HOLLAND. 

BY    PROFESSOR  H.  Y.  GROENEWEGEN,  D.D.,    OF    THE    UNIVERSITY   OF 
LEIDEN,  HOLLAND. 

It  is  impossible  to  survey  at  a  glance  the  present  conditions  of 
the  liberal  religious  movement  in  Holland.  They  are  rather  com- 
plicated. But  I  will  tell  you  something  about  our  work  and  our 
struggle  which  may  be  of  interest  to  you.  At  first  sight,  and  seen 
from  the  outside,  our  circumstances  do  not  seem  very  favorable. 
There  is  going  on  in  our  country  a  very  powerful  so-called  "  Chris- 
tian Action."  That  action  is  the  consequence  of  a  monstrous 
political  alliance  which  came  about  several  years  ago  between 
Calvinists  and  Roman  Catholics.  Nobody  will  be  ingenuous  enough 
to  think  that  it  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  which  suddenly  made 
brethren  of  enemies  hating  and  cursing  each  other  for  centuries. 
Only  the  very  worldly  kingdom  of  politics  bound  them  together.  It 
is  a  Christianity  not  of  one  common  holy  spirit,  but  of  common 
aversion  to  liberal  principles  and  aims.  It  is  a  Christianity  of,  for 
the  greater  part,  worldly  interests;  for  instance,  some  appetite  for 
treasury-pap  for  the  so-called  Christian  schools  and  free  univer- 
sities.   It  is  a  Christianity,  as  we  call  it,  of  the  polls. 

The  Christian  character  is  said  by  them  to  be  found  in  the  belief 
in  a  particular  revelation  of  God.  I  need  not  say  that  this  superna- 
tural revelation  is  not  the  same,  and  has  not  the  same  content 
for  these  coalescing  parties.  So  it  cannot  prevent  many  serious 
differences  in  practical  policy;  for  instance,  the  questions  of  capital 
punishment,  vaccination,  etc.  "  Christian  "  journals,  however,  written 
by  orthodox  ministers  and  priests,  become  more  and  more  authorita- 
tive interpretators  of  this  revelation  in  matters  of  government.  Every 
one  who  joins  the  coalition  is  held  to  be  a  Christian.  Every  one 
who  does  not  is  suspected  of  living  outside  the  Christian  sphere. 


i66 

So  our  people  have  become  divided  into  "Christians"  and  "pagan- 
ists."  Liberal  religious  thinkers  and  workers  are,  of  course,  said 
to  be  infected  with  paganism,  and,  therefore,  are  to  be  shunned  like 
wolves  in  sheep's  clothing.  And  liberal  politics,  because  the 
enemy  of  all  church  supremacy  in  political  and  social  life,  is  pagan- 
ism itself.  This  sad  mistake,  not  to  say  this  offensive  untruth,  is 
bewildering  about  half  our  nation.  Orthodox  and  conservatives  of 
every  denomination  are  systematically  aroused  to  war  against  the 
supposed  haters  of  God  and  religion,  Christ  and  the  Church.  This 
"  Christian  "  policy  has  been  a  success  at  the  polls.  We  have,  indeed, 
since  a  few  years,  a  liberal  government  with  a  very  small  majority. 
But  the  next  elections,  I  am  afraid,  will  give  us  again  the  supremacy 
of  clericalism  and  confessionalism.  And  it  is  not  to  be  foreseen 
what  effect  this  will  have  on  several  of  our  public  institutions,  most 
of  all  on  the  theological  studies  at  the  universities. 

It  is  a  striking  fact  that  our  liberal  religious  movement  has  but 
very  little  influence  in  this  political  struggle.  There  is  a  funda- 
mental aversion  among  liberals  to  any  religious  political  action.  But 
very  few  of  our  ministers  appear  in  political  meetings,  except  the 
Christian  Socialists.  Among  the  liberal  daily  papers  there  are  some 
of  rather  sympathetic  spirit.  Others  show  a  great  indifference  for 
religious  interests.  But  nearly  all  of  them  shrink  from  touching 
religious  subjects  and  maintain  a  cold  neutrality.  In  the  House  of 
Commons  only  a  few  liberal  members  are  religiously  inclined,  and 
they  seldom  bear  witness  to  their  religious  principles.  So  it  is  not 
very  obvious  what  characterizes  us.  There  is  no  common  opinion 
on  several  questions  among  us.  All  varieties  of  the  liberal  political 
party  can  be  found  among  our  religious  liberals.  There  are  re- 
ligious conservatives,  radicals,  and  socialists  among  us.  We  are  a 
hardly  distinguishable  subdivision  of  the  general  liberalism.  And 
very  many  of  the  members  of  that  party,  alas!  are  rather  indifferent 
to  religion,  or  are  even  anti-religious. 

But  I  trust  that  in  this  respect  the  tide  is  on  the  turn.  Our  nation 
does  not  like  clericalism  and  confessionalism  as  much  as  it  seems 
to,  yet  our  national  spirit  is  a  religious  one,  and  most  of  the  people 
distrust  movements  which  shock  their  deepest  and  dearest  convic- 
tions. Liberalism,  however,  is  often  identified  with  theoretical  and 
practical  materialism.     Many  of  the  teachers  in  our  public  schools, 


167 

higher  and  lower,  are  propagators  of  a  rather  banal  atheism. 
Antipathy  and  prejudice  have  estranged  a  great  many  well-educated 
people  from  any  church  connection.  A  great  number  does  not 
obtain  any  religious  instruction  at  all.  The  rude  ignorance  and, 
in  consequence,  indifference  of  many  people  about  the  Bible,  religion, 
and  the  church,  is  a  shame.  Seen  from  this  side,  the  reaction  may 
be  a  favorable  thing.  Every  defeat  of  liberalism  is  in  revenge  of 
its  neglect  of  its  own  religious  concerns.  If  liberalism  for  a  long 
time  remains  powerless  in  political  and  social  life,  it  is  because  it 
has  created  the  mistaken  impression  that  its  spirit  and  principles 
are  hostile  to  religion  and  higher  morality.  It  will  only  reconquer 
the  heart  of  our  nation  if  it  becomes  again,  as  it  was  some  fifty  years 
ago,  a  party  the  political  and  social  life  of  which  is  founded  not  only 
on  science  and  elevated  not  only  by  art,  but  by  a  powerful  religious 
belief  and  high  moral  consciousness.  As  long  as  it  overlooks  the 
depth  of  our  inner  life,  where  we  touch  the  Eternal  Spirit  ruling  over 
all,  liberalism  does  not  deserve  to  rule  over  our  external  life  and 
practical  relations.     That  is  what  the  history  of  to-day  teaches  us. 

It  is,  however,  an  arduous  task  which  is  given  us  in  the  present 
situation.  Spiritual  life  is  awake  and  intense  enough,  but  the  liberal 
religious  movement  has  acquired  neither  the  place  nor  the  influence 
it  ought  to  have.  Among  our  most  important  artists,  poets,  and 
prose  writers  there  are  many  who  do  not  hesitate  to  express  their 
religious  thoughts  and  feelings,  and  most  of  these  are  far  from  any 
orthodoxy.  But  very  few  of  them  show  sympathy  with  us,  strive  after 
nearer  relations  with  our  ministers  and  scholars,  or  appear  in  our 
churches,  even  when  our  best  preachers,  who  are  artists  in  their  way, 
are  in  the  pulpit.  This  is  partly  a  matter  of  fashion,  partly 
caused  by  prejudice  and  ignorance.  Perhaps  it  would  change  if  there 
again  appeared  among  us  a  real  poet  who  should  express  with 
striking  beauty  what  we  think,  feel,  and  aim  after.  As  for  the 
scientific  side  of  spiritual  life,  science  was  from  the  beginning  the 
most  powerful  force  of  our  movement.  So  it  is  still  to-day.  Was 
this  an  advantage  or  an  injury?  At  all  events  it  was  a  danger. 
Science  can  purify  the  seed  of  religious  belief,  but  it  can  also  abolish 
it,  and  it  can  never  sow  it  or  grow  it.  Many  of  our  scholars  seem 
to  forget  that  the  science  of  religion  is  not  more  important  than 
religion  itself.    And  what  practical  value  has  the  science  of  religion, 


i68 

if  living  piety  cannot  give  a  scientific  expression  to  the  free,  devel- 
oped belief  of  to-day?  We  need  more  and  more  a  philosophy  of 
religion  which  does  not  avoid  the  metaphysical  problems.  For  the  in- 
fluence of  our  historical  and  critical  researches  we  cannot  be  thankful 
enough.  The  old  dogmatism  is  as  a  time-worn  rock  in  the  current 
of  science.  Pieces  break  off  every  day.  Many  fancy  themselves 
established  on  immovable  stone,  and  to-morrow  they  are  caught  by 
the  floating  waves,  vainly  trying  to  hold  to  the  rock  with  nerveless 
hands.  Most  of  the  so-called  orthodox  are  forced  to  make  an  irreso- 
lute compromise  between  the  traditional  dogmas  and  scientific  dis- 
closures. Lately  two  ministers  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church  in 
The  Hague  were  brave  and  upright  enough  to  give  in  their  sermons 
some  critical  considerations  of  Bible  words,  but  the  discussion  they 
roused  in  their  own  and  orthodox  circles  was  not  whether  such  heret- 
ical opinions  could  be  tolerated  in  the  Church,  but  whether  it  was  pru- 
dent to  bring  theology  to  the  congregation  from  the  pulpit.  A  great 
number  of  their  followers,  however,  still  calling  themselves  orthodox, 
attend  with  interest  their  services.  No  confessionalism  is  proof 
against  truth  and  liberty.  Therefore,  though  it  is  likely  that  con- 
servatism and  so-called  orthodoxy  in  the  National  Church  will  secure 
an  increasing  power  in  church  government  and  in  many  congrega- 
tions, the  more  than  three  hundred  liberal  ministers  in  Holland 
may  be  of  good  courage.  The  influence  of  our  spirit  and  principles 
is  diffused  much  more  widely  than  we  know.  And  the  main  thing 
is  not  the  victory  of  our  name  and  party,  but  the  free  evolution  of 
religious  thought  and  life. 

Among  the  internal  phenomena  of  our  religious  movement,  two 
things  seem  to  be  very  significant.  First,  there  is  growing  up  a 
better  insight  into  the  value  of  historical  feeling  for  the  common 
religious  life.  Thirty  years  ago  many  liberals  thought  that  there 
was  no  longer  reason  for  the  existence  of  the  smaller  religious  bodies 
which  had  become  liberal,  such  as  the  Remonstrant  Brother- 
hood, or  the  Mennonite  Society  in  most  of  its  congregations. 
Their  ideal  was  to  form  free  congregations  everywhere  without  unit- 
ing them  with  the  historical  churches  of  any  denomination,  and  to 
make  our  Dutch  Protestantenbond,  or  "  Protestant  Union,"  an  asso- 
ciation which  is  composed  of  men  of  all  sects,  the  new  organization 
of  all  religious  liberals.     This  proved  a  failure.     It  was  short- 


169 

sighted  to  overlook  that  these  historical  bodies  have  their  own  char- 
acter and  have  had  an  honorable  past.  They  have  their  proper 
place  in  the  spiritual  life  of  our  people,  and  fulfilled  during  centuries 
their  proper  task  in  the  struggle  for  religious  evolution.  How  could 
a  brand-new  organization,  without  a  past  or  place  in  the  people's 
history,  created  for  the  uses  of  to-day,  take  their  place?  Love  and 
respect  for  bodies  which  have  done  so  much  and  suffered  for  the  sake 
of  freedom  in  Christian  thought  and  life  opposed  themselves  to 
this  idea.  And  this  love  was  not  a  narrow  spirit  of  sectarianism, 
it  was  the  vivid  consciousness  of  an  historical  reality  which  ought 
not  to  give  place  to  the  vagueness  of  an  unpractical  idealism. 

There  is  no  better  means  for  realizing  ideas  and  principles  than 
a  true  affection  for  the  concrete  bodies  that  have  incorporated  them. 
An  agglomeration  of  liberals  of  every  denomination  has  neither 
past  nor  future.  I  think  this  is  felt  and  experienced  in  all 
circles  of  sympathizers  which  are  not  affiliated  with  the  old  liberal 
religious  bodies.  Most  of  the  sections  of  our  Protestantenbond  in 
Holland  are  really  separate  organizations  of  liberal  members  of  the 
Dutch  Reformed  Church,  trying  to  secure  the  ascendency  of  their 
principles  in  their  own  beloved  congregations.  In  other  places, 
where  the  liberals  no  longer  had  any  hopes,  they  went  over  together 
to  another  sect,  forming  new  Remonstrant  or  Mennonite  congre- 
gations, most  of  which  are  very  flourishing.  Only  in  Amsterdam  is 
there  a  free,  independent  congregation  alongside  the  other  liberal 
organizations.  It  is  the  centre  of  a  vigorous  spiritual  life,  owing 
to  its  leader,  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz.  But  it  is  as  clear  as  it  is  prom- 
ising that  love  for  the  old  National  Church  is  increasing  among  its 
liberal  members  and  ministers.  Its  old  friends  are  joining  closer 
together  to  promote  their  principles  within  their  Church.  They 
form  nowadays  provincial  unions  in  order  to  give  support  to  the 
poorer  congregations. 

It  would,  indeed,  be  fortunate  if  an  intolerant  orthodoxy  could  be 
bridled.  For  it  behaves  as  if  there  were  no  liberal  members  in  the 
Church.  In  Amsterdam  the  last  liberal  minister  in  the  National,  or 
Dutch  Reformed  Church  has  been  replaced  by  an  orthodox  one. 
No  wonder  that  the  number  of  liberal  members  decreases  every  year. 
But,  wherever  they  can,  they  ought  to  maintain  themselves  courage- 
ously.    Only  where  the  situation  is  quite  hopeless  they  would  do 


170 

better  to  found  new  congregations.  If  they  lose  all  their  love  for 
the  old  powerful  Church  which  the  greater  part  of  the  people  belongs 
to,  they  will  also  lose  many  opportunities  to  enter  with  their  prin- 
ciples into  the  life  of  the  people. 

Concerning  the  smaller  liberal  denominations  in  Holland  the 
more  their  members  love  their  history,  character,  and  peculiar 
mission,  the  more  their  congregations  will  nourish  and  will  increase 
in  the  future.  They  need  not  be  unfriendly  towards  nor  jealous 
of  each  other.  They  should  rather  be  conscious  that  they  are  work- 
ing together  for  a  common  aim.  Co-operation  is  most  prosperous 
in  free  self-reliance.  Our  International  Congresses  are  an  eloquent 
proof  of  this.  Even  so  it  is  the  task  of  our  Protestantenbond  to 
increase  the  consciousness  of  a  common  aim  and  of  fraternal  feeling 
among  brethren  living  and  working  each  in  his  own  house,  and  to 
unite  them  in  works  of  common  interest  which  cannot  be  performed 
by  the  separate  churches  and  congregations.  And  there  is  surely 
something  to  be  done  in  that  great  workshop  called  the  world! 

The  other  thing  which  characterizes  our  inner  religious  life  is 
the  striving  after  what,  perhaps,  is  to  be  called  a  more  religious 
religion.  We  have  been  long  enough  a  theologizing  and  moralizing 
part  of  Christianity.  Now  we  are,  I  think,  sufficiently  sure  that  the 
Bible  is  not  a  literally  inspired  revelation,  that  the  traditional  dogmas 
are  but  a  very  defective  expression  of  religious  truth,  and  that  the 
evolution  of  religion  is  leading  men  away  from  the  old  opinions. 
The  moral  side  of  our  religious  consciousness  has  also  been  long 
enough  put  in  the  front.  But  we  need  to  become  assured  again 
what  we  may  believe  as  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen,  the  sub- 
stance of  things  hoped  for,  as  a  trust  in  things  to  strive  after.  Among 
our  preachers  those  are  the  most  loved  who  are  not  only  the  best 
orators,  but  also  utter  most  clearly  and  resolutely  their  purely  religious 
convictions,  and  whose  personal  piety  is  felt  as  the  touch  of  a  life 
which  kindles  life.  Many  people  have  got  tired  of  theological, 
Biblical,  historical,  and  moral  questions.  They  want  to  adore,  to 
trust,  to  obey,  to  love  their  God.  They  want  the  pure  religion  of 
the  gospel.  If  we  do  not  give  it  simply,  clearly,  and  warmly,  fresh 
from  the  heart  to  the  heart,  people  will  be  seeking  elsewhere,  partly 
in  the  fantastic  and  mystic  congregations  of  Theosophy  and  Spirit- 
ism,  partly  in  the  confusing  speculations  of  Hegel's  philosophy, 


I7I 

which  gives  a  new  interpretation  to  the  old  dogmatic  terms.  And 
the  longing  for  a  new  religious-moral  activity  goes  astray  in  social- 
ism. Most  of  our  Christian  Socialists  are  full  of  warm  religious 
feeling.  But,  the  more  stress  they  lay  on  social  reform,  the  greater 
danger  that  they  will  bring  more  religious  people  to  socialism  than 
socialists  to  religion. 

It  is,  however,  felt  in  all  classes  that  the  best  evolution  of  religion 
is  not  to  be  found  in  theologically  purified  opinions,  but  in  the  one 
thing  needful, — that  we  at  last  become  true  religious  beings,  children 
of  God.  I  hope  and  trust  this  requirement  is  not  a  warning,  but  a 
promise. 


172 

The  Committee  on  Nominations  recommended  that  the  following 
persons  serve  as  an  Executive  Committee  of  the  International  Council 
of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers 
until  the  next  Congress:  Rev.  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  Boston, 
U.S.A.,  Chairman;  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte,  Boston,  Mass.,  U.S.A., 
General  Secretary;  Professor  G.  Boros,  D.D.,  Kolozsvar,  Hungary; 
Rev.  W.  Copeland  Bowie,  London,  England;  Professor  J.  Estlin 
Carpenter,  D.D.,  Oxford,  England;  Professor  B.  D.  Eerdmans,  D.D., 
Leiden,  Holland;  Rev.  Max  Fischer,  D.D.,  Berlin,  Germany;  Rev. 
George  A.  Gordon,  D.D.,  Boston,  U.S.A. ;  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz, 
Jr.,  Amsterdam,  Holland;  Professor  E.  Montet,  D.D.,  Geneva, 
Switzerland;  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer,  D.D.,  Berlin,  Germany; 
Professor  Martin  Rade,  D.D.,  Marburg,  Germany;  Professor  Jean 
Reville,  D.D.,  Paris,  France;  Rev.  J.  fimile  Roberty,  Paris,  France; 
Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer,  Zurich,  Switzerland;  Miss  M.  B.  Westenholz, 
Copenhagen,  Denmark. 

The  report  was  accepted,  and  the  persons  nominated  were  elected 
by  the  meeting. 

The  President. — I  am  going  to  ask  you  to  greet  two  more  friends 
this  morning,  for  I  think  we  have  time  enough,  and  you  will  all  want 
to  hear  a  stirring  word  from  the  north  of  Scotland  to  wind  up  with. 
I  wish  I  could  pause  to  tell  of  the  glories  of  Switzerland,  but  I  can 
only  ask  you  to  greet  Dr.  Rochat,  who  was  the  secretary  of  the  Execu- 
tive Committee  at  the  Geneva.  Council,  and  to  whom  we  owe  much. 
He  will  tell  us  of  the  condition  of  this  cause  in  the  French-speaking 
cantons  of  Switzerland.     Rev.  Dr.  Rochat,  of  Geneva. 

Dr.  Rochat  spoke  in  French.  A  translation  of  his  remarks  is 
given  herewith: — 


i73 


THE   CONDITION   OF   LIBERAL   PROTESTANTISM 
IN  ROMANCE  SWITZERLAND. 

BY  REV.  ERNEST  ROCHAT,  D.D.,  OF  GENEVA. 

It  does  not  seem  necessary  to  define  here  what  is  meant  by  Lib- 
eral Protestantism.  Every  one  is  aware  of  that  important  movement 
which  has  taken  place  at  the  heart  of  Reformed  Christianity.  Let 
us  then  without  preliminary  approach  the  subject  of  which  we  are 
to  treat, — the  Condition  of  Liberal  Protestantism  in  Romance  Switz- 
erland; that  is  to  say,  in  the  cantons  of  Geneva,  Vaud,  and  Neu- 
chatel. 

These  three  cantons,  forming  to-day  parts  of  the  same  whole,  the 
Swiss  Confederation,  united  more  especially  among  themselves  by 
a  common  vernacular,  the  French  language,  have,  none  the  less, 
each  a  peculiar  character  and  temperament.  Their  respective 
histories  sufficiently  explain  these  peculiarities;  but  because  to-day 
they  have  united  their  interests  with  those  of  a  common  country, 
and  because  from  a  political  point  of  view  they  form  but  a  single 
unit,  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  there  exists  among  them  a 
general  uniformity.  What  is  suited  to  one  is  not  suited  to  another, 
and  under  the  reign  of  liberty  each  follows  the  way  best  adapted  to 
itself,  a  way  dictated  by  its  instinct  or  its  tradition.  For  the  same 
reasons,  the  fact  that  the  people  of  these  cantons  in  former  days 
accepted  the  Reformation  almost  unanimously,  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily follow  that  they  have  welcomed  with  the  same  sympathy  this 
more  recent  reformation  which  goes  by  the  name  of  Liberal  Protes- 
tantism. 

Individualism,  which  is  one  of  the  characteristics  of  Protestant- 
ism, has  had  time  since  the  Reformation  to  affirm  itself  and  expand, 
and  this  perhaps  explains  why  Liberal  Protestantism,  which  ap- 
pears to  us  as  a  logical  consequence  of  the  movement  inaugurated 
by  the  great  Reformers,  has  not  been  seized  upon  and  accepted  by 


i74 

the  mass  of  the  Protestant  population.  It  follows  from  all  this 
that,  in  order  to  present  some  clear  observations  on  the  subject  under 
consideration,  we  must  refrain  from  giving  a  view  of  the  whole,  and 
are  obliged  to  consider  each  of  these  groups  by  itself. 

In  Geneva,  about  a  century  after  the  death  of  Calvin,  a  need  for 
emancipation  with  regard  to  his  doctrine  manifested  itself.  Towards 
the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century  Louis  Tronchin  and  Chouet 
opposed  the  dogma  of  predestination,  and  this  opposition  was  still 
more  marked  in  the  person  of  Alphonse  Turrettini.  It  was  owing 
to  the  influence  of  this  eminent  man  that  a  little  more  liberty  was 
permitted  to  penetrate  into  religious  ideas,  and  that  it  was  declared 
in  1725  that  the  catechism  of  Calvin  should  no  longer  be  placed  on 
a  level  with  the  Scriptures.  We  may  say,  taking  into  account  the 
circumstances  and  the  time,  that  the  need  of  doctrinal  liberty  asserted 
itself  in  the  face  of  the  authority  of  the  Calvinistic  regime. 

The  theologians  of  the  eighteenth  century  allowed  themselves  to 
be  influenced  by  the  contemporary  philosophical  movement,  and 
endeavored  to  prove  that  the  Gospels  contain  nothing  contrary  to 
the  principles  of  plain  common  sense.  In  the  nineteenth  century 
the  struggle  became  sharper.  Illustrating  two  opposing  points  of 
view,  we  find  Professor  Cheneviere  demanding  that  reason  be  granted 
her  legitimate  rights,  declaring  himself  an  enemy  of  confessions  of 
faith  and  combating  the  dogmas  of  the  Trinity  and  of  original  sin — 
he  was  a  Unitarian — and  Pastor  Gaussen,  strongly  attached  to  ortho- 
doxy, and  known  by  his  work,  "La  Theopneustie,  ou  Pleine  In- 
spiration des  Saintes  Ecritures."  The  struggle  of  these  two  ten- 
dencies, of  which  we  are  about  to  speak,  ended  by  the  establish- 
ment, in  opposition  to  the  faculty  of  theology  at  the  old  university, 
of  a  school  of  theology  which  was  to  represent  and  maintain  ortho- 
doxy. To  this  school  Edmond  Scherer  was  called  in  1846.  He 
entered  rigidly  orthodox,  and  left  three  years  later,  in  1849,  one 
of  the  champions  of  modern  theology.  We  will  not  enter  here  into 
details  that  would  lead  us  from  our  subject,  simply  remarking  that 
Scherer  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  figures  of  our  epoch,  for  by 
his  thought  and  influence  he  is  still  among  us,  and,  together  with 
Colani,  Reuss,  and  Albert  ReVille,  by  his  very  valuable  collabo- 
ration in  the  Strasbourg  Theological  Review,  one  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished and  zealous  apostles  of  Liberal  Protestantism. 


175 

This  need  of  independence,  this  desire  expressed  by  certain  Ge- 
nevan theologians,  not  to  permit  theology  to  fall  behind  the  general 
movement  of  thought,  maintained  itself.  It  is  therefore  no  cause  for 
surprise  if,  thanks  to  the  influence  exercised  by  men  holding  the 
ideas  of  the  school  of  the  Strasbourg  Theological  Review,  and  to  the 
progress  of  a  more  modern  conception  of  Christianity  in  the  neigh- 
boring cantons  of  Vaud  and  Neuchatel,  a  group  of  pastors  and 
laymen  found  themselves  ready  to  propagate  and  defend  at  Geneva 
the  principle  of  what  has  since  been  called  Liberal  Protestantism. 
The  year  1873  saw  its  official  advent  in  the  Church  of  Geneva.  It 
had  the  majority  of  the  Consistory  on  its  side,  and  it  profited  by  this 
to  accomplish  the  triumph  of  its  opinions  and  principles. 

As  one  may  easily  believe,  this  transformation  was  not  accom- 
plished without  struggle  and  strife.  There  was  an  unhappy  period 
during  which  orthodoxy,  sustained  by  the  government  of  that  day 
and  by  popular  favor,  declared  itself  deprived  of  its  ancient  rights, 
and  charged  the  Church  of  Geneva  with  being  responsible  for  their 
loss.  Having  at  its  head  men  of  faith,  action  and  intelligence,  and 
confident  in  the  power  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus,  Protestant  Liberalism 
took  its  place  in  the  directing  body  of  the  church,  the  Consistory, 
in  the  pastoral  body  by  the  nomination  of  pastors,  and  in  the 
theological  faculty  of  the  University  by  the  nomination  of  pro- 
fessors imbued  with  modern  scientific  principles. 

Liberal  Protestantism,  therefore,  demanded  its  place  in  the  body 
of  the  National  Church  of  Geneva,  and  obtained  it.  Not,  however, 
without  difficulty.  It  was  reproached  with  being  destructive,  neg- 
ative. This  reproach  was  not  without  foundation;  but  since  Lib- 
eral Protestantism  could  no  longer  accept  Protestant  tradition, 
since  it  could  no  longer  accept  the  dogmatic  theology,  it  was  bound  to 
declare  what  beliefs  appeared  to  it  outworn  and  offensive  to  its  con- 
science, it  was  bound  to  criticise  the  accretions  of  the  past.  It  could 
no  longer  accept  the  miracles, — it  said  so;  original  sin, — it  said  so;  the 
divinity  of  Jesus, — it  said  so.  No,  this  first  period  in  the  life  of 
Liberal  Protestantism  could  not  be  other  than  critical.  In  this 
there  was  perhaps  a  loss,  but  there  was  this  inestimable  advantage, — 
the  taking  of  a  definite  position,  of  not  permitting  to  exist,  as  was 
elsewhere  the  case,  any  equivocation,  any  hypocrisy,  and  of  demon- 
strating to  the  people  that  there  existed  a  tendency  capable  of  re- 


176 

maining  religious  and  Christian  while  following  the  movement 
of  the  general  thought.  Liberal  pastors,  it  goes  without  saying, 
were  treated  as  rationalists.  It  was  desired  to  discredit  them,  and 
the  efforts  in  this  direction  were  successful.  Moreover,  Liberal 
Protestantism  was  reproached  with  being  in  league  with  a  political 
party, — the  radicals.  It  is  true  that  Liberal  Protestantism  found  a 
warm  welcome  among  the  radical  leaders  of  that  time.  Demand- 
ing, as  the  condition  of  its  existence,  the  revision  of  the  laws  govern- 
ing the  Church,  it  turned  towards  those  who  understood  its  point  of 
view  and  desired  its  triumph.  In  a  small  republic,  where  traditions 
are  powerful,  where  party  strife  is  so  keen,  and  where  class  distinc- 
tion is  by  no  means  unknown,  this  marked  affinity  of  Liberal  Prot- 
estantism for  the  radical  political  party,  though  exacted  by  circum- 
stances, at  once  alienated  many  sympathizers  whom  it  otherwise 
would  have  found  among  the  Geneva  conservatives.  In  certain 
circles  the  claims  and  aspirations  of  Liberal  Protestantism  were 
contemptuously  disowned,  and  it  was  included  with  radicalism  in 
a  common  aversion.  However,  this  politico-religious  association 
is  not  a  unique  and  astonishing  phenomenon.  Is  not  the  history 
of  the  Reformation  intimately  connected  with  political  history? 
And  in  European  countries,  where  the  political  government  did  not 
aid  the  new-born  reform,  what  has  become  of  Protestantism?  Wit- 
ness France,  Italy,  and  Spain.  The  ecclesiastical  regime,  resulting 
from  the  association  of  Liberal  Protestants  and  Radicals,  was, 
it  must  be  admitted,  so  advantageous  that  very  few  in  the  present 
generation  would  wish  to  restore  the  old  state  of  affairs.  This  fact 
is  not  without  significance. 

The  struggle  between  liberal  and  orthodox,  at  first  so  intense, 
finally  subsided.  Members  of  a  church  cannot  live  in  a  continual 
state  of  war.  The  Liberal  Protestants,  children  of  the  church  of 
Geneva,  had  their  recognized  place  in  the  house  of  their  fathers; 
their  demands  had  been  taken  into  consideration;  they  asked  no 
more.  A  period  of  peace  and  reconciliation  followed,  and  for  this 
the  liberals  were  not  the  last  to  work.  For  about  fifteen  years  the 
church  of  Geneva  has  marched  calmly  on  its  way,  including  among 
its  members  those  who  were  once  brothers  at  war,  liberals  and  ortho- 
dox. 

What   did   Liberal   Protestantism    become    during   this   period? 


177 

That  it  encountered  difficulties  goes  without  saying.     Orthodoxy, 
or,  to  call  it  by  the  name  it  prefers,  the  Evangelical  party,  has  pre- 
served the  organization  it  formed  in  the  days  of  strife.     The  Na- 
tional Evangelical  Union,  the  centre  of  this  organization,  with  its 
own  special  pastors  and  with  the  chapels  it  holds,  really  forms,  as 
has  been  said,  a  church  within  a  church.    If  the  Evangelical  pastors, 
or  at  least  a  certain  number  of  them,  show  in  the  affairs  of  the 
National  Church  a  true  fraternal  breadth,  the  case  is  different  when 
it  is  a  question  of  offices  depending  directly  on  the  National  Union: 
they  are  always  ready  to  maintain  the  principles  of  orthodoxy  against 
liberalism.     The  aristocratic  Genevese  society  and  all  that  centres 
around  it,  ignores  Liberal  Protestantism.     In  this  society  is  wealth, 
the  devotion  facilitated  by  leisure,  social  influence,  and  attachment 
(sometimes  a  mere  matter  of  fashion)  to  religious  traditions.    The 
more  democratic  liberals  appear,  by  contrast,  effaced.     Although 
liberalism  to-day  numbers  devoted  friends  in  the  different  political 
parties,  the  memory  of  that  time  when,  by  force  of  the  circum- 
stances we  have  mentioned,  liberalism  made  itself  the  willing  syn- 
onym of  radicalism,  still  hovers  over  it  to  its  hurt,  and  turns  from 
it  many  who  will  not  take  the  trouble  to  study  its  principles  at  first 
hand.     Many  of  the  early  liberals  to-day  prove  lukewarm,  some 
absolutely  indifferent.      They  cherish  always  the  memory  of  the 
combats  and  the  brilliant  passages-at-arms  of  thirty  years  ago.    That 
was  the  heroic  age!    They  sigh  for  it;  and,  though  they  are  by  nature 
very  amiable,  they  have  withdrawn  to  their  tents.     They  have  un- 
fortunately failed  to  understand  that  an  evolution  is  necessary  to 
liberalism,  that  its  hour  is  come,   and  that,  after  having  declared  in 
what  respects  it  disagreed  with  orthodoxy,  it  must  affirm  its  prin- 
ciples and  its  faith,  offering  to  souls  the  sustenance  of  religion  and 
the  Gospels.     By  a  strange  contradiction   the  new  position  which, 
little  by  little,  gained  for  it  the  sympathy  of  the  moderate  Evangel- 
ists, alienated  its  early  friends.     Born  of  a  popular  movement,  en- 
couraged and  sustained  by  the  people  at  its  beginning,  we  would  be 
justified  in  supposing  that  liberalism  would  have  retained  its  favor. 
When  from  the  midst  of  the  people  the  Socialist  party  sprang  into 
being,  the  tie  was  broken.     This  new  body  early  showed  itself  to  be 
anti-religious.     Contrary  to  what  is  the  case  elsewhere  in  Switzer- 
land, where  Socialism  is  not  indifferent  to  the  religious  and  Protest- 


i78 

ant  question,  at  Geneva  this  new  party,  unfortunately  inspired  with 
a  spirit  foreign  to  our  traditions,  wished  to  make  an  anti-clerical 
issue  at  a  time  when  the  clerical  question  was  not  under  debate,  and 
included  in  its  condemnation  clericalism  and  religion, — a  fact  which 
did  not  prevent  it,  on  a  recent  memorable  occasion,  from  destroying 
the  ancient  National  Protestant  Church  of  Geneva,  and  allying  itself 
with  the  Roman  Catholics.  It  is  not  alone  with  us  that  these  two 
extreme  parties  are  found  marching  hand  in  hand.  Will  Protestant- 
ism, particularly  Liberal  Protestantism,  be  able  to  regain  its  position 
in  the  centre  of  Socialism  ?    The  future  will  tell. 

This  is  the  dark  side  of  the  picture:  let  us  look  now  at  the  bright 
side.  In  becoming,  so  to  speak,  more  positive,  in  affirming  more 
than  at  its  beginning,  in  showing  itself  less  combative  with  respect 
to  the  traditional  doctrine,  Liberal  Protestantism  appeared  to  its 
adversaries  in  a  more  acceptable  light.  Thus  it  has  penetrated  into 
circles  which  it  had  seemed  must  be  forever  closed  to  it,  and  drew 
away  from  orthodoxy  many  thoughtful  minds.  Its  influence,  in- 
stead of  diminishing,  has,  on  the  contrary,  considerably  extended. 
But  this  gain,  at  least  up  to  the  present  time,  has  not  been  realized 
under  the  form  of  a  numerical  growth  of  the  liberal  party.  Evan- 
gelical thought  has  modified  itself,  and  to  our  advantage.  The 
liberal  method  has  been  understood,  and  has  prevailed.  This  is 
proved  in  the  attitude  of  many  Evangelicals  towards  liberals  in 
religious  affairs,  also  by  the  fact  that  a  member  of  the  orthodox 
party  declared  very  recently,  at  a  session  of  the  Consistory,  that  in 
his  estimation  the  existence  of  the  left  wing  of  our  church  has  been 
advantageous  to  the  party  as  a  whole,  and  that  he  now  admitted 
this,  although  he  would  not  have  done  so  formerly.  Thus  the  old 
orthodoxy,  little  by  little,  has  permitted  itself  to  be  influenced  by  lib- 
eral ideas.  But,  of  these  partisans,  those  whose  influence  would  carry 
most  weight  do  not  acknowledge  themselves  as  liberals.  The  word 
is  feared:  it  is  compromising.  Among  the  laity  we  know  more  than 
one  who,  while  loudly  declaring  themselves  to  be  no  longer  able  to 
subscribe  to  the  traditional  orthodoxy,  nevertheless,  by  a  strange 
contradiction,  follow  pastors  of  the  orthodox  cloth.  Among  so- 
called  Evangelical  pastors  we  know  more  than  one  who  would  like 
to  see  the  word  "liberal"  disappear  from  our  common  speech.  This 
would  ease  their  consciences:    they  could  then  be  liberals  without 


179 

saying  so  and  without  anybody's  knowing  it.  Thus  one  part  of 
orthodoxy  clings  to  the  old  ways  from  habit  and  tradition.  This  is 
particularly  true  of  the  old  families.  Another  part,  ill-instructed, 
in  spite  of  our  efforts,  in  the  principles  of  Liberal  Protestantism,  is 
outside  all  organizations,  and  wishes  to  attach  itself  to  none.  This 
is  disorder,  spiritual  anarchy.  It  even  wishes  to  be  regarded  as  a 
church.  We  may  differ  in  opinion  as  to  what  constitutes  a  church; 
but  we  may  ask  ourselves,  What  would  subsist  among  these 
people,  and  how  would  the  religious  flame,  the  enthusiasm,  the  faith, 
the  prepossession  in  favor  of  the  spiritual  life,  be  sustained  among 
them?  Although  each,  in  his  own  opinion,  is  stronger  and  wiser 
than  his  neighbor,  few  among  them  are  sufficiently  inquiring,  suf- 
ficiently interested  in  their  development,  firm  enough  or  high-minded 
enough,  to  be  able  to  dispense  with  an  organization,  a  centre  of 
spiritual  life.  This  may  lead  to  sad  retrogressions:  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic Church,  in  particular,  is  ever  ready  to  receive  them  into  its  arms 
when  the  time  shall  have  come.  Finally,  many  are  liberals  without 
knowing  it:  let  us  not  be  too  much  surprised  if  they  do  not  join  us. 
Orthodoxy  can  no  longer  maintain  its  old  positions.  It  has  been 
compelled  to  listen,  and  to  yield  to  evidence.  It  is  vanquished  by 
the  liberal  method.  As  a  proof  of  this,  we  will  simply  refer  to  the 
publication  of  the  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  by  Lucien 
Gautier  (Lausanne,  1906).  Professor  Gautier  defended  as  long 
as  possible  the  old  views,  since  then  he  abandoned  them.  After 
having  in  his  celebrated  lectures  explained  the  Old  Testament 
according  to  the  results  of  the  historical  and  critical  method,  he  has 
just  published  for  the  general  public  the  popular  work  we  have 
named.  He  writes  in  his  preface  this  significant  sentence:  "Our 
contemporary  society  is  not  without  knowledge  that  on  these  grave 
subjects  new  opinions  have  been  framed,  and  that  the  views  of  com- 
petent men  have  been  modified  within  twenty,  thirty,  forty,  or  fifty 
years."  M.  Gautier  has  been  listened  to  in  a  world  until  now 
hostile  to  works  emanating  from  the  liberal  school;  and  this  world 
has  approved  and  followed.  On  the  day  when  a  similar  result 
shall  be  achieved  for  the  New  Testament,  a  domain  as  yet  reserved, 
a  long  step  forward  will  have  been  taken.  That  day  will  come:  it 
will  come  in  strength,  and  it  will  bring  with  it  the  defeat  of  the  system 
of  orthodox  dogma,  which  now  terribly  suffers  from  the  disorder  in 


i8o 

which  the  Evangelical  party  finds  itself.  That  day  will  also  be  the 
proclamation  of  the  victory  of  the  method  upheld  by  Liberal  Prot- 
estantism. 

Can  Liberal  Protestantism  exist  as  a  party?  This  is  a  question 
which  we  do  not  take  upon  ourselves  to  answer.  To-day,  in  Geneva, 
among  those  who  interest  themselves  in  religious  affairs,  there  is 
much  prejudice  against  party  and  party  spirit.  Thus  our  people, 
generally  speaking,  hesitate  very  much  to  declare  themselves  for  this 
or  that  party,  and  young  pastors  entering  on  their  ministry  refuse  to 
attach  themselves  to  any  organization  whatsoever,  liberal  or  orthodox. 
That  we  fight  against  party  spirit,  if  this  be  proud,  arrogant,  or  un- 
just, if  it  upholds  wickedness  or  incites  hatred,  is  perfectly  lawful; 
but  is  it  wrong  for  men  of  similar  disposition,  like  sympathies,  and 
having  the  same  ideas  in  common,  to  form  themselves  into  groups, 
first  because  they  take  pleasure  in  being  together,  and  then  because 
it  pleases  them  to  see  the  ideas  which  they  hold  in  common  gain 
ground  and  spread?  We  are  persuaded  to  the  contrary;  and  we 
even  say — what  were  otherwise  a  commonplace,  but  necessary  here 
to  repeat — that  it  is  in  bringing  people  together  of  their  own  free  will, 
and  uniting  their  forces,  that  there  is  any  chance  of  success.  For 
the  time  being  we  are  on  unknown  ground.  The  popular  vote* 
of  the  30th  of  last  June,  which  has  broken  the  ties  that  since  the 
establishment  of  the  Reformation  at  Geneva  united  us  with  the 
State,  and  suppressed  by  this  act  our  National  Church,  leaves  us  in 
embarrassment   and   perplexity.     Can  our  present  Church,   under 

*The  National  Church  of  Geneva  has  succumbed  to  a  coalition  composed 
of  anti-religious  elements,  Socialists,  Roman  Catholics,  and  of  Protestants  who 
are  separatists  by  conviction.  In  the  canton  of  Neuchatel  where  the  same 
question  of  the  suppression  of  the  budgets  of  religious  worship  was  put  before 
the  people  in  the  spring  of  1907,  it  was  decided  in  the  negative.  The  people 
of  Neuchatel  also  stood  by  their  national  churches  by  a  very  large  majority. 
The  parties  grouped  themselves  in  the  same  manner  as  in  Geneva,  except 
that  in  Neuchatel  the  Roman  Catholics  voted  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
budget  of  the  various  cults.  If  they  rejected  it  at  Geneva,  it  was  from 
various  motives.  Since  1873,  n°t  wishing  to  submit  to  the  ecclesiastical  laws 
imposed  by  the  people  of  Geneva,  they  had  constituted  a  church  independent 
of  the  State,  supported  by  voluntary  contributions,  and  were  thus  no  longer 
included  in  the  budget  of  the  cults.  They  recently  voted  for  the  separation  of 
Church  and  State  in  the  hope  of  annihilating  the  Old  Catholics  and  in  the 
hope  of  dealing  a  severe  blow  against  the  Protestants. 


ITV 


REV.  PAUL  REVERE  FROTHINGH AM 

Boston,  Mass. 


PRES.  FRANKLIN  C    SOUTHWORTH 
Meadville,  Penn. 


REV.  MISS  GERTRUDE  VON  PETZOLD 
Leicester,  England 


REV.  JENKIN  LLOYD  JONES 
Chicago,  III. 


iSl 

existing  conditions,  continue  to  maintain  itself  as  a  free  church? 
We  would  like  to  hope  so.  Under  the  influences  of  religion  and 
patriotism,  hearts  are  drawn  together.  From  the  Evangelical  side, 
voices  of  authority  have  declared  that  the  door  of  their  common 
home  shall  not  be  closed  against  liberal  Protestants.  So  be  it.  It 
is  none  the  less  true  that  for  them,  more  than  for  others,  the  situa- 
tion is  grave,  and  that  they  need,  besides  the  help  of  God,  the  aid 
of  all  their  friends.  Liberalism  will  pass,  perhaps,  through  days 
of  trial,  but  the  conquests  it  has  made  are  assured,  and,  if  it  con- 
tinues in  its  efforts  to  place  religious  thought  in  harmony  with 
modern  science,  it  has,  without  doubt,  the  future  before  it.  It  will 
always  present  itself  as  a  religious  philosophy  capable  of  responding  to 
the  spiritual  needs  of  modern  generations. 

If  we  have  entered  with  some  detail  into  the  circumstances  sur- 
rounding Liberal  Protestantism  in  Geneva,  it  is  for  the  reason  that 
here  alone,  in  all  Romance  Switzerland,  the  movement  is  at  the 
present  time  organized. 

The  beginning  of  Liberal  Protestantism  in  Neuchatel  and  in  the 
canton  of  Vaud — a  beginning  which  had  given  birth  to  bright  hopes 
for  the  future — has  come  to  nothing.  It  was  a  fire  of  straw.  At 
Neuchatel,  after  the  events  provoked  by  Professor  Buisson, — which 
came  to  an  issue  in  the  liberal  constitution  of  the  National  Church 
of  Neuchatel,  and  led  to  the  establishment  of  an  independent  church 
by  the  other  side, — liberalism,  qualified  by  rationalism,  could  not 
maintain  itself.  Officially,  it  quickly  disappeared.  Nevertheless, 
it  may  be  said,  in  a  general  way,  that  in  the  academical  and  theologi- 
cal faculties,  and  in  the  National  Church,  "the  critical,  historical, 
in  short,  scientific  method  prevails  to-day  in  the  teaching  of  the  pro- 
fessors, and  thus  the  new  theology  is  filtered  little  by  little  into  the 
pastoral  body."  From  this  movement  has  resulted  a  transforma- 
tion in  the  preaching  and  the  attitude  of  the  pastors. 

In  the  canton  of  Vaud,  after  the  lectures  of  Messrs.  Buisson,  A. 
Reville,  and  Pdcart  at  Lausanne,  Liberal  Christianity  was  planted 
in  Vaudois  centres  and  received  from  the  laity  an  eager  welcome. 
It  founded  a  section  of  the  Union  of  Liberal  Christianity.  In  short, 
a  chronicler  could  write,  in  1874,  that  there  was  a  very  marked  liberal 
current:  about  thirty  pastors  manifested  their  sympathy  for  the 
new  ideas.     But  we  are  compelled  to  believe  that  after  this  first  ardor 


l82 

the  Vaudois  character  reasserted  itself.  Rather  slow,  respecting 
the  traditions,  with  no  inclination  for  individual  initiative,  desirous 
of  guarding  against  change,  doubtless  it  saw  in  the  new  movement  a 
revolution,  and  did  not  long  compromise  itself  with  it.  The  word 
"liberal,"  also,  was  disapproved.  The  last  pastor  who  dared  to  bear 
that  label  has  lately  died,  at  a  very  advanced  age,  after  having  been 
long  since  retired  from  the  actual  ministry:  this  was  M.  Audemars, 
who  offered  the  opening  prayer  at  the  International  Congress  at 
Geneva.  Professor  Paul  Chapuis,  who  finally  openly  attached  him- 
self to  progressive  Christianity,  and  who  was  also  a  member  of  the 
same  Congress,  died  also  about  the  same  time,  so  that  I  believe 
one  would  to-day  seek  in  vain  for  a  liberal  Protestant  in  our  neigh- 
boring canton.  But  men  may  be  found,  professors  of  the  Faculty 
of  Theology  at  Lausanne,  having  the  spirit  of  Liberal  Protestant- 
ism, and  who  have  recourse  to  methods  made  honorable  by  the 
men  we  have  named.  Need  we  mention  Dandiran,  Emery,  For- 
nerod  ?  Not  that  we  desire  to  constrain  these  gentlemen  to  classify 
themselves  under  any  category  whatsoever:  it  is  not  for  us  to  deter- 
mine the  position  they  have  taken.  We  simply  wish  to  point  out 
that  they  admit,  for  instance,  the  results  of  historical  criticism,  as 
well  for  the  New  Testament  as  for  the  Old;  that  they  have  recourse 
to  experimental  and  scientific  methods;  that  they  subscribe,  for  in- 
stance, to  the  ideas  of  Auguste  Sabatier,  even  claiming  to  have 
anticipated  him.  Certain  among  them  regard  Christianity  as  a 
life,  reject  all  authority,  that  of  the  Book  with  that  of  the  Church, 
or  of  a  church,  not  accepting  as  the  Word  of  Truth,  though  it  come 
from  the  Apostle  Paul  or  from  Jesus  Christ  himself,  anything  but 
that  which  finds  an  echo  in  the  conscience  of  man;  and  rejecting 
the  miracles,  even  those  of  the  New  Testament.  Thanks  to  these 
influences,  there  exists  in  the  Vaudois  church  a  movement  in  the 
sense  of  liberalism,  but  not  making  use  of  the  word  "liberal." 
Also,  orthodox  believers,  in  the  traditional  sense  of  the  term,  are 
very  few.  The  majority  of  the  pastoral  body  has  taken  a  middle 
position,  but  one  which  is  neither  very  clear  nor  very  logical. 
Thus,  for  instance,  they  believe  in  the  miracles,  in  the  bodily  resur- 
rection of  Jesus,  as  do  their  followers  among  the  religious  public. 
After  having  been  stimulated  to  form  personal,  independent  con- 
victions, some  pastors  fall  back  and  re-enter  the  borders  of  ortho- 


i*3 

doxy,  and  here,  as  elsewhere,  always  for  the  same  reason,  because 
to  attach  themselves  to  this  body  that  goes  by  the  name  of  or- 
thodoxy appears  to  them  the  easiest  and  simplest  thing  to  do.  It 
is  a  pillow  of  indolence  which  has  for  some  a  very  strong  attraction. 
In  spite  of  all  this  we  may  rejoice  in  the  progress  realized.  We  must 
have  patience.  The  ideas  so  dear  to  us  will  doubtless  win  their  way, 
and  future  generations,  in  accepting  them,  will  experience,  perhaps, 
some  gratitude  towards  the  workers  of  the  early  days,  by  whom  these 
ideas  were  defended  and  propagated. 

The  President. — You  will  welcome  as  our  last  speaker  this 
morning  a  man  who  comes  from  the  country  where  it  is  said  that  the 
majority  of  the  people  roll  a  sweet  morsel  of  John  Calvin  under  their 
tongues  before  breakfast.  Mr.  Alexander  Webster  will  tell  us  of  the 
progress  of  theology  in  Scotland. 


184 


THE   DEVELOPMENT   OF   THEOLOGY   IN 
SCOTLAND. 

BY  REV.   ALEXANDER  WEBSTER,   OF  ABERDEEN. 

It  is  told  of  an  ardent  Scottish  emigrant  that  in  his  inborn  rever- 
ence for  the  thistle,  the  sturdy  symbol  of  his  country,  he  took  with 
him  plenteous  seeds  of  the  spiked  plant  and  scattered  them  in  the  land 
of  his  adoption. 

I  trust  that  I  will  not  be  regarded  as  having  any  design  of  thistle- 
sowing  while  I  seek  to  relate  the  story  of  our  spiky  Scottish  theology. 
I  assure  you  it  has  now  more  down  than  pricks.  But  even  for  the 
thorn  a  justification  is  possible.  Naturalists  tell  us  that  it  helps  to 
keep  the  soil  open,  and,  while  asses  live,  it  is  a  necessity.  Even  for  the 
thistle  in  theology  we  may  well  have  sympathy,  and,  turning  "the 
weeder  clips"  aside,  we  may  spare  "the  symbol  dear"  from  ruthless 
handling. 

What  may  be  called  the  Authorized  National  Theology  of  Scotland 
is  embodied  in  the  Confession  of  Faith  adopted  by  the  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  1647. 

It  was  the  labored  product  of  the  divines  whose  sittings  at  West- 
minster occupied  five  years.  Several  times  in  the  preceding  hundred 
years  various  vain  attempts  were  made  to  construct  and  authorize  a  na- 
tional creed.  The  country  was  fiercely  divided  ecclesiastically.  A  pre- 
sumptuous prelatic  party  opposed  the  Presbyterian  party,  and  apart 
from  these  factions  there  was  a  papistical  unsubdued  remnant  and 
a  considerable  body  of  non-conformists — Quakers  and  others — who 
liked  not  any  of  the  fighting  sections.  At  length  the  Presbyterian 
party  got  the  upper  hand,  and,  leagued  with  the  Puritans  in  ascend- 
ency in  England,  they  produced  a  Confession  which  by  their  power 
was  carried  into  law. 

The  English  circumstances  favored  the  Presbyterial  movement  in 


i«5 

Scotland,  and  its  leaders  were  delighted  with  the  invitation  to  "pro- 
pound, consult,  trial,  and  conclude,"  with  the  Southern  reformers 
"  in  all  such  things  as  might  conduce  to  the  utter  extinction  of  Popery, 
Prelacy,  Heresy,  Schism,  Superstition,  Idolatry,  and  to  consider  as  to 
the  settlement  which  was  so  much  desired  of  a  union  of  the  whole 
island  under  one  common  catechism,  one  directory,  and  one  con- 
fession." 

There  was  a  great  deal  of  sectarian  finessing  and  political  diplo- 
macy in  connection  with  the  work  of  Assembly,  and,  though  the  six 
Scots  commissioners  were  astute  and  determined  Presbyterians,  they 
had  to  acquiesce  in  a  confession  not  altogether  to  their  mind.  Indeed, 
they  were  outwitted.  Twenty  thousand  Scots  had  crossed  the  border 
to  join  the  fight  against  Charles  I.,  and  in  the  expectation  that 
England  would  become  Presbyterian,  but  the  diplomatic  promise 
given  to  the  Scottish  ear  was  broken  to  the  hope. 

On  its  presentation  to  the  General  Assembly  the  confession  was 
objected  to  on  some  points,  specially  with  regard  to  its  Erastian  defer- 
ence to  the  Civil  Magistrate,  but  it  was  approved  by  the  majority, 
and  became  the  creed  of  the  nation.  The  Assembly  enacted  that  a 
copy  of  it,  of  the  catechisms  and  the  directory  for  family  worship, 
should  be  in  every  house.  The  imposition  of  the  confession  was 
coercive.  There  were  many  who  would  not  acknowledge  it  as  repre- 
senting their  faith,  but  it  was  forced  on  those  who  held  office. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Confession  of  Faith  did  not  become  in  any 
intelligent  and  deliberate  sense  the  creed  of  the  people.  It  origi- 
nated as  an  arbitrary,  official,  ecclesiastical  thing.  It  was  never  any 
more  than  a  sectarian  manifesto,  and  even  as  such  it  only  represented 
the  zealots.  Many,  in  signing  it  for  office'  sake,  did  so  with  a  mark  of 
dissent. 

As  a  dogmatic  statement,  it  had  more  dignity  and  weight  than  any 
of  its  precursors.  In  the  circumstances  it  was  inevitable.  Nothing 
but  a  new  papacy  could  have  cast  out  the  old.  The  autocracy 
changed  name  and  place,  but  did  not  dissolve.  The  presbyter  was 
but  the  priest  with  another  title  and  residence.  It  is  very  difficult  to 
measure  exactly  the  influence  of  the  Standards  on  the  national  char- 
acter. 

Buckle  makes  the  Presbytery  more  powerful  than  the  Parliament. 
We  know  from  Burns  how  keen  the  people  were  on  Kirk  matters. 


i86 

"They  lay  aside  their  private  cares 
To  mind  the  Kirk  and  State  affairs, 
They'll  talk  o'  Patronage  and  Priests 
Wi'  kindling  fury  in  their  breasts." 

But  withal  the  Kirk  was  not  so  mighty  as  Buckle  thought. 

Every  Sabbath  there  was  to  be  seen  the  listlessness  described  by 
R.  L.  Stevenson  in  his  "Lowden  Sabbath  Morn,"  following  the  an- 
nouncement of  the  text: — 

"For  noo's  the  time  when  pows  are  seen 
Nidnoddin'  like  a  mandarin; 
When  tenty  mithers  stap  a  preen 

In  sleepin'  weans, 
An'  nearly  half  the  parochine 

Forget  their  pains. 
There's  just  a  waukrife  twa  or  three; 
Thrawn  Commentators  swear  to  gree, 
Weans  glowrin'  at  the  bumlin'  bee 

On  windie  glasses 
Or  lads  that  tak  a  keek  a-glee 

At  sonsie  lasses." 

Froude  credits  the  Standards  with  being  the  source  of  the  "conscien- 
tious fear  of  doing  evil "  in  the  Scottish  breast,  but  that  is  an  exagger- 
ation. Certainly,  the  Standards  were  elevated  as  fetiches  by  clerical 
authority,  and  there  was  much  superstitious  deference  paid  to  them. 
The  songs  of  Burns  have  gone  deeper  into  the  Scottish  soul  than 
the  Standards.  The  primary  influence  of  the  Standards  is  traceable 
to  the  Shorter  Catechism.  Every  child  within  the  Presbyterian  fold 
had  to  learn  that  catechism.  Burns  hit  off  the  glibness  piously 
praised: — 

"Wee  Davock, 

Tho'  scarcely  langer  than  your  leg, 

He'll  screed  ye  aff  Effectual  Calling 

As  fast  as  any  in  the  dwelling." 

The  task  defeated  itself.  The  learning  was  not  congenial,  and  pro- 
duced repugnance  rather  than  respect.  Yet  the  language  of  the 
catechism  haunted  the  mind  with  a  weird  authority. 

The  tenacious  hold  of  Calvinistic  theology  for  two  hundred  and 
fifty  years  in  Scoltand,  with  more  or  less  tightness,  is  accounted  for 


i87 

socially  by  the  strength  of  feudalistic  conceptions  and  customs.  The 
Scotch  are  clannish,  conservative  of  tradition,  and  put  seriousness 
into  their  habits.  Our  poets  have  made  patriotism  a  glory.  Wal- 
lace and  Bruce  are  great  political  heroes  in  our  imagination. 

The  tales  of  the  Covenanters  are  still  a  power. 

The  main  factors  of  the  making  of  the  Scottish  character  lie  apart 
from  any  body  of  speculative  doctrine,  and  are  mainly  climatic  and 
economic. 

Partly  by  a  rigorous  climate  and  partly  by  pious  direction  the  Scot 
was  made  a  reflective  person.  His  faculties  got  an  inturning  habit 
which  turned  to  morbidness.  His  life  was  largely  subjective.  He 
brooded,  and  became  intensely  introspective. 

The  picture  of  himself  which  our  poet  drew  fitted  thousands  of  his 
lowly  countrymen : — 

"Ben  i'  the  spence  right  pensivelie 

I  gaed  to  rest.  .  .  . 
There  lanely  by  the  ingle-cheek 

I  sat.  .  .  . 
All  in  this  mottie  mistie  clime 

I   backward  mused." 

In  such  musing,  self-knowledge  came,  and  sometimes  the  face  of 
the  inlooker  grew  redder  over  what  it  saw  within  than  the  peat  was 
in  the  fire.  Every  such  reflector,  even  one  of  "  the  unco  guid,"  might 
say,— 

"God  knows,  I'm  no  the  thing  I  should  be, 
Nor  am  I  even  the  thing  I  could  be." 

Ere  the  Confession  of  Faith  was  framed,  the  Scot  had  his 
special  characteristics.  The  struggle  for  independence  and  all 
that  lay  behind  it  had  produced  a  distinctly  marked  species. 
The  portraits  of  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  century  Scots  betoken 
the  high-cheek-boned,  intellectual,  perfervid,  dour  sort  familiar 
now  all  over  the  world.  Out  of  the  ingrained  characteristics  in 
a  state  of  ferment  the  Confession  of  Faith  came.  It  was  involved 
in  the  political  drama  in  which  the  Scottish  people  were  engaged. 
That  drama  represented  the  uprising  of  democratic  sensibility  and 
idealism.  There  were  possibilities  in  the  Scottish  nature  stirring 
to  be.    The  Scottish  soul  was  moving  in  worlds  not  yet  realized. 


i88 

The  force  of  tribal  rule  and  clannish  autonomy  had  broken  up,  the 
ancient  feudalism  had  spent  itself  in  pride  and  blood,  and  a  hardy 
individualism  vaguely  sought  opportunity.  The  leaven  of  intelli- 
gence was  working  upon  the  old  ignorance:  mind  was  stirring  in  the 
masses;  the  idea  of  personal  and  national  freedom  was  rising. 

At  the  emergence  of  intellect  the  suppressive  powers  were  abashed, 
Pope  and  priest  were  discarded,  and  the  king  and  lords  who  suc- 
ceeded were  set  up  as  instruments  of  the  people's  will. 

A  reconstruction  of  theology  accompanied  the  reconstruction  of 
politics.  A  new  Confession  of  Faith  in  God  arose  along  with  the  new 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  monarch.  The  sovereignty  of  God,  which 
was  the  dominant  note  of  the  confession,  was  the  theologic  correl- 
ative of  the  supreme   monarchy  accomplished    by  the    revolution. 

The  new  king  was  empowered  by  the  victorious  section,  and  was 
supposed  to  rule  and  legislate  in  their  interest.  He  was  to  maintain 
Protestant  Presbyterianism. 

Presbyterians  were  his  favorite  people.  All  others  he  reprobated 
and  doomed  to  dishonor.  The  Confession  of  Faith  in  all  its  details 
reflected  the  political  treaty  marking  the  era  of  Presbyterian  power. 
The  confessed  Deity  was  the  projection  of  a  monarch  partial  to  an 
elect  number,  head  of  his  heavenly  court  as  the  king  was  of  his  earthly 
court. 

The  reform  of  the  State  accomplished  by  the  dominant  sect  was 
expected  to  issue  in  measureless  happiness  to  the  mass.  The  country 
purged  of  papacy  and  heresy  would  enter  upon  a  new  bliss. 

The  heaven  of  the  confession  is  that  imagined  bliss  transferred 
to  Paradise. 

Its  saints  and  holy  angels  are  glorified  Covenanters.  The  theology 
of  the  reformers  is  an  upthrown  reflection  of  their  ideal  of  politics, 
a  sky-picture  of  the  State  they  conceived.  To  the  new  earth  they 
added  a  new  heaven. 

The  Presbyterians  regarded  themselves  as  instruments  in  God's 
hands  for  purging  the  country  of  false  religion.  They  took  hold  of 
the  Hebraism  of  the  Bible,  and  sought  to  establish  it.  To  them  the 
promise  of  God  had  come.  They  were  the  chosen  people,  and  to 
them  was  committed  the  task  of  making  a  Christian  theocracy. 
The  men  of  the  covenant  were  possessed  of  an  enthusiasm  which 
made  them  heroic.    They  were  fanatical  over  their  ideal,  and  fought 


1 89 

and  bled  for  it  rapturously.    Their  confession  had  in  it  the  self- 
satisfied  assertion  expressed  jauntily  in  the  Blue  Bonnet  song: — 

"That  the  haill  world  may  see 
That  there's  nane  in  the  richt  but  we 
O'  the  auld  Scottish  nation." 

Wallace  had  prepared  the  way  for  Knox. 

The  fight  for  physical  liberty  was  the  prelude  to  the  fight  for  spiritual 
liberty.  Freedom  of  conscience  came  after  freedom  of  arm.  Free 
politically,  Scotland  must  be  free  ecclesiastically.  The  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant  was  a  sequel  to  the  Treaty  of  Indepen- 
dence. 

But  the  reformers  did  not  reckon  with  their  own  dogmatism  and 
autocracy.  They  did  not  see  that  in  casting  off  one  tyranny  they 
took  on  another.  But  so  it  was.  The  confession  became  a  con- 
straint. The  Reformed  Church  produced  its  own  restrictions. 
The  infallible  Bible  involved  a  bondage  as  close  and  as  sore  as  the 
infallible  pope  did. 

The  confession  was  a  recrudescence  of  clannishness.  The  con- 
fessors were  the  supreme  clansmen:  the  non -confessors  were  the 
rebel  clans. 

The  movement  for  the  liberation  of  the  mind  from  bondage  to 
autocratic  authority  was  arrested  from  within.  The  liberators  in- 
stituted a  new  slavery.  They  caused  all  masters  of  colleges  and 
schools,  all  teachers  therein,  and  all  scholars  at  the  passing  of  their 
examination  for  degrees  to  subscribe  to  the  Covenant. 

Later  they  made  subscription  to  the  Confession  of  Faith  a  condition 
of  official  position  in  universities. 

The  direct  result  of  these  restrictions  was  that  the  thinkers  who 
sought  proper  liberty  wrought  outside  the  Church  in  a  hostile  way. 
Any  real  philosophy  and  science,  as  well  as  all  spontaneous  literature, 
appeared  beyond  Kirk  bounds. 

The  revolt  of  the  native  spirit  from  Calvinism  is  plainly  traceable 
in  the  Scottish  literature  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  from  thence 
onward  in  growing  intensity.  It  is  evident  in  all  departments  of 
literature, — in  philosophy,  science,  economics,  poetry,  and  fiction. 

The  spontaneous  Scottish  literature  is  not  Calvinistic,  but  all  along 


190 

its  free  line  presents  an  effective  counter-action  to  orthodoxy.  It 
has  expressed  the  real  live  thoughts  and  feelings  of  the  Scottish  soul 
and  represented  the  growing  point  in  Scottish  thought. 

Instinctively,  orthodoxy  set  itself  against  the  native  philosophy 
and  poetry.  To  the  philosophers  of  the  school  of  Hume  it  gave 
special  opposition.  Yet  the  philosophers  have  had  more  to  do  with 
the  development  and  adaptation  of  theology  than  the  theologians 
themselves.  The  dogmatists  tried  hard  to  make  philosophy  in  the 
universities  the  procuress  of  Calvinism,  and  the  philosopher  had  to 
protest  and  struggle  strenuously.  The  freedom  for  philosophy  was 
won,  and  in  all  the  universities  the  law  of  variation  in  philosophic 
thought  has  shown  itself.  In  his  day  Francis  Hutcheson,  the  phi- 
losopher, was  an  avowed  opponent  of  Calvinism,  and  later  in  the 
same  university  the  Cairds  in  their  Hegelianism  were  influential 
modifiers  of  the  confessional  theology. 

At  Aberdeen  the  synthetic  method  had  a  brilliant  representative 
in  Alexander  Bain.  He  was  an  unchurched  man,  and  declined  the 
ecclesiastical  touch,  even  for  his  grave. 

Science,  economics,  poetry,  fiction,  were  all  driven  abroad  by  the 
confessors,  and  from  their  haunts  in  the  "brown  heath  and  shaggy 
wood"  they  sent  forth  their  deviations,  which  the  people  took  to  as 
manna. 

But  everything  has  its  compensation.  The  Scot  has  never  been  so 
great  in  physics  as  in  metaphysics.  The  objective  study  was  denied 
to  him,  and  he  avenged  himself  by  being  metaphysical.  The  re- 
pression of  natural  studies  by  the  Church  had  certainly  the  effect  of 
throwing  the  mind  back  on  itself.  Nature  was  made  diabolic  by 
orthodoxy.  Every  extraordinary  or  uncanny  occurrence  was  re- 
garded as  Satanic.  To  search  nature  was  to  find  Satan.  He  was 
usually 

"Yont  the  dyke  .  .  .  bumman, 
Or,  rustlin  thro'  the  bour-trees,  coman." 

So  the  people  kept  indoors  and  trembled.  In  these  circumstances, 
investigation  of  nature  was  not  undertaken.  Later,  when  there  was 
more  courage  and  the  geologists  ventured  forth  among  the  rocks, 
discoveries  were  made  that  staggered  the  pious  searcher.  When 
Hugh  Miller  realized  the  age  of  the  red  sandstone  and  thought  of 


I9I 

the  dogma  of  the  six  days'  creation  and  Usher's  chronology,  his 
brain  reeled  and  madness  ensued. 

The  current  idea  regarding  the  overnight  shore-searchings  of  his 
friend  Robert  Dick  of  Thurso — that  they  were  trysts  with  the  devil — 
was  fostered  by  the  Kirk  in  the  interest  of  its  Standards.  All  that  was 
avenged  by  the  divine  adjustment  that  will  have  things  balanced. 
Deprived  of  physics,  we  shine  in  metaphysics.  Still,  we  have  Lyell 
and  Geikie  to  show,  while  we  grudge  the  discrepancy. 

The  reformers  did  indeed,  in  their  exclusive  way,  promote  learning, 
but  it  was  all  to  be  subdued  to  orthodox  belief  and  practice.  To 
what  they  regarded  as  mere  secular  learning  they  were  opposed. 
It  was  a  distraction  and  a  dissipation.  For  philosophy  they  had  no 
encouragement,  for  science  they  had  naught  but  a  ban. 

The  pursuit  of  literature  was  profanity  of  intellect.  The  one  thing 
that  learning  was  needed  for  was  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible. 
In  the  Canon  of  Scripture  was  all  knowledge,  and  its  study  was  the 
only  holy  and  sacred  labor. 

And  so  it  came  to  pass  that  culture  was  separated  from  religion 
and  condemned.  It  was  driven  into  a  kind  of  paganism,  and  we 
find  it  in  the  next  century  after  the  imposition  of  the  confession  in 
avowed  revolt  from  Calvinism. 

It  stood  out  against  the  Hebraism  of  the  Church  with  a  Humanism 
which  was  directly  inspired  by  French  thought.  It  sought  other 
ground  for  moral  philosophy  than  that  which  the  orthodox  theology 
presented.  It  turned  eagerly  to  human  nature,  to  find  in  its  intui- 
tions the  sanction  of  ethics.  There  was  a  complete  breach  between 
the  philosophy  and  theology.  The  theologians  regarded  the  phi- 
losophers as  infidels.  In  the  biography  of  the  Haldanes  we  have 
a  characteristic  lamentation  regarding  the  heretics.  The  infidelity 
of  David  Hume,  Adam  Smith,  and  their  coadjutors,  first  infecting 
the  university,  had  gradually  insinuated  its  poison  into  the  ministra- 
tions of  the  Church. 

"Some  had  altogether  thrown  off  the  mask,  like  the  eminent 
Professor  Playfair.  .  .  .  Other  ministers,  with  more  inconsistency, 
exhibited  the  same  infidelity,  while  they  still  ate  the  bread  of  ortho- 
doxy. Dr.  McGill,  of  Ayr,  had  published  a  Socinian  work,  ...  yet 
even  he  was  absolved  by  the  Assembly.  Dr.  Robertson,  the  friend 
of  Hume  and  Adam  Smith,  was  not  without  reason  more  than  half 


192 

suspected,  while  Dr.  Blair's  'Moral  Sermons'  had  shown  how  in 
Scotland,  as  well  as  in  England,  the  professed  ministers  of  Christ 
could  become  (in  the  words  of  Bishop  Horseley)  'little  better  than 
the  apes  of  Epictetus.'" 

But  these  infidels  were  the  needed  critics  and  correctors  of  ortho- 
doxy and  the  representatives  of  rationalism,  the  pioneers  of  the 
Higher  Criticism.  From  their  work  the  evolving  energies  proceeded. 
Moderates  (as  they  were  called),  they  were  really  the  mellowers  and 
modifiers  of  the  intense  severity  and  fierce  bigotry  of  the  Confes- 
sionalists.  It  was  inevitable  that  they  should  to  some  extent  go 
to  the  other  extreme,  and  introduce  a  latitudinarianism  and  a  laxity 
which  tended  to  intellectual  and  moral  libertinism,  but  withal  they 
exercised  a  healthy  liberalizing  influence. 

Reproachfully  it  was  said  of  them  by  the  biographer  already 
referred  to:  "They  were  utterly  careless  about  the  merits  of  any 
creed  or  confession.  .  .  .  Their  sermons  generally  turned  on  honesty, 
good  neighborhood,  and  kindness.  They  were  free  from  hypocrisy. 
They  had  no  more  religion  in  private  than  in  public.  They  were 
loud  and  obstreperous  in  declaiming  against  enthusiasm  and  fanati- 
cism, faith  and  religious  zeal.  But,  though  frightfully  impatient  of 
everything  which  bore  the  resemblance  of  seriousness  and  sober 
reflection,  the  elevation  of  brow,  the  expansion  of  features,  the 
glistening  of  the  eye,  the  fluency  and  warmth  of  speech  at  convivial 
parties,  showed  that  their  heart  and  soul  were  there,  and  that  the 
pleasures  of  the  table  and  hilarity  of  the  light-hearted  and  the  gay 
constituted  their  paradise,  and  furnished  them  with  the  perfection 
of  their  joy."     Over  against  that  we  may  set  the  reference  of  Burns  to 

"Shaw  and  Dalrymple's  eloquence, 

!    i    .  McGill's  close  nervous  excellence, 

McQuae's  pathetic  manly  sense." 

These  genial  and  liberal  men,  reproached  as  wine-bibbers  and 
associates  of  sinners,  helped  in  a  kindly  way  to  relax  the  "rigid 
feature"  and  realize  the  tyranny  of  the  asperity  which  took  to  itself 
the  warrant  of  piety.  They  blessed  the  natural  affections  that 
were  banned  by  the  preachers  of  total  depravity,  and  encouraged 
the  poetic  spirit. 

From  them  we  trace  a  line  of  intellectual  and  ethical  revolt  within 


*93 

the  Church  itself  against  the  theology  of  the  confession.  That  line 
indicates  the  path  of  learning,  originality,  and  progress. 

The  Church  marked  it  as  the  way  of  disloyalty,  and  placed  its 
sternest  censure  and  severest  punishment  there. 

In  that  line  there  is  a  very  notable  succession  of  prescient,  cultured, 
and  courageous  men,  who  in  various  ways  keenly  felt  the  bondage 
of  the  authorized  creed,  and  discerned  that  it  was  not  according  to 
the  higher  Biblical  authority  nor  in  harmony  with  enlightened  reason. 
A  loftier  intellectuality,  a  finer  conscience,  or  a  subtler  spirituality 
than  common,  was  theirs.  They  were  treated  as  unbelievers,  apos- 
tates, subverters  of  the  faith,  and  marked  with  a  specially  obnoxious 
brand,  but  they  were  actually  the  better  believers,  more  loyal  to 
truth  and  faithful  to  their  function  as  interpreters  of  divine  things 
than  those  who  stigmatized  them.  They  should  have  been  specially 
honored  for  their  prophesying  and  bravery.  They  were  vindicators 
of  liberty,  exemplars  of  rational  thought,  illustrators  of  outspoken- 
ness. They  gave  voice  to  the  deeper  consciousness  of  the  time,  and 
uttered  the  humanism  of  the  cultured  spirit.  While  the  poets  and 
story-tellers  expressed  the  revolt  of  the  general  heart  from  the  en- 
forced dogma,  they  expressed  the  protest  of  the  theological  intellect 
and  the  religious  soul. 

It  is  humiliating  now  to  think  of  the  heresy  cases  of  the  Scotch 
sects.  All  the  sects  took  their  turn  at  self-wounding  and  impover- 
ishment by  prosecuting  their  most  prophetic  men.  These  now 
appear  as  shameful  mistakes,  and  expose  the  lack  of  foresight  and 
insight,  the  blindness  of  bigotry,  and  the  utter  stupidity  of  the 
coercive  method  followed  in  defence  of  the  Standards.  The  heretics 
were  the  real  victors.  The  verdict  of  history  is  with  them.  Though 
some  were  cast  out  with  a  ban  upon  them  and  others  were  retained 
with  the  cross  of  censure  and  suspicion  on  their  backs,  the  truth 
was  with  them,  the  credit  is  theirs. 

In  his  review  of  the  legal  and  other  aspects  of  subscription  to  the 
Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  the  searching  and  candid  principal 
of  St.  Andrew's  University  says,  "I  ask  my  readers  to  consider 
whether  it  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  cultivated  men  can  subscribe 
these  articles  as  articles  of  their  own  faith."  And  he  adds  the  grim 
reflection,  "The  men  who  framed  the  Confession  of  Faith,  ...  if 
they  had  been  alive  in  the  present  day,  would  no  doubt  have  rejected 


194 

three-fourths  of  the  special  doctrines  of  the  Minority  Free  Church," 
— that  is,  of  their  own  standard.  Dr.  Donaldson  admits  with  some 
pride  that  the  Presbyterian  sects  have  all  more  or  less  "deviated" 
from  the  Standards. 

The  great  Scotch  preachers  have  mainly  been  variations,  deviators 
from  the  orthodox  type  of  thought.  They  broke  the  monotony  of 
delivery,  not  only  by  their  preaching  style,  but  by  their  ideas. 
Chalmers,  Guthrie,  Macleod,  Caird,  Service,  were  remarkable  vari- 
ations. Any  specially  felt  pulpit  power  in  Scotland  has  been  that 
of  a  non-conformist,  one  who  rose  above  creedal  restrictions  and 
spoke  out  of  his  own  soul. 

The  regenerative  influence  in  Scottish  theologic  thought  came  from 
these  deviators.  The  advanced  group  of  preachers  that  presented 
"Scotch  Sermons"  as  an  illustration  of  a  "style  of  teaching  which 
increasingly  prevails  among  the  clergy  of  the  Scottish  Church"  in- 
dicated clearly  the  line  of  departure.  They  declared  that  their  work 
is  "  the  work  of  those  whose  hope  for  the  future  lies,  not  in  the  altera- 
tions of  ecclesiastical  organization,  but  in  the  profounder  appre- 
hension of  the  essential  ideas  of  Christianity,  and  especially  in  the 
growth  within  the  Church  of  such  a  method  of  presenting  them 
as  shall  show  that  they  are  equally  adapted  to  the  needs  of 
humanity  and  in  harmony  with  the  results  of  critical  and  scientific 
research." 

In  other  sects,  variation  wrought  for  development.  The  most 
notable  recent  instance  of  that  is  in  the  case  of  Professor  Henry 
Drummond,  of  the  United  Free  Church.  His  frank  and  fresh  intro- 
duction of  evolution  into  theological  thought  had  a  regenerative 
power,  and  his  vivifying  influence  would  have  gone  deeper  if  the 
leaders  had  encouraged  it. 

Unfortunately  for  such  renewal  by  deviation,  church  politics  have 
absorbed  the  main  attention  of  the  sects.  The  recent  disruption 
in  the  United  Free  Church  put  back  theological  concern  indefinitely. 
That  Church  had  to  fight  for  its  property  and  status,  and  its  anxiety 
for  some  time  will  be  politic.  Its  plight  has  affected  the  position  of 
the  Established  Church,  and  in  that  section  also  concern  has  to  be 
directed  to  temporalities.  Meanwhile  theology  in  Scotland  is  in 
the  background.  It  waits  on  adjustment  of  subscription  to  the  con- 
fession.    But,  while  it  is  stunted  with  us,  it  is  in  prominence  in  Eng- 


i95 

land.  There  the  advocates  of  the  new  theology  are  troubling  the 
pool  of  orthodoxy.  The  divine  spirit  must  needs  have  its  spokes- 
man.   "Would  God  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets!" 

Perhaps  the  most  powerful  agent  of  development  acting  in  the 
Church  is  the  Higher  Criticism.  All  the  sects  suspected  and  sup- 
pressed it. 

The  Free  Church  fought  it  blindly  and  bitterly  in  the  person  of 
Professor  Robertson  Smith,  and  deposed  him  from  his  chair.  The 
resistance  was  vain,  and  now  with  bitter  grace  entrance  and  work 
are  granted.  The  criticism  has  taken  away  the  textual  basis  of  the 
Standards  and  necessitated  the  reconstruction  of  faith.  The  churches, 
with  the  corpse  of  confession  upon  their  bier,  have  realized  that 
"the  letter  killeth."  But  there  is  no  ready  grave  to  bury  the  Standards 
in,  "though  they  are  slain  and  dead." 

Along  with  the  Higher  Criticism  as  a  developing  force  there  have 
to  be  reckoned,  among  other  things,  the  natural  evolution  of  mind, 
the  increase  of  science,  the  intensification  of  moral  intuition,  and 
the  continuous  alteration  thereby  of  the  perspectives  of  history  and 
destiny. 

It  may  appear  from  the  outside  that  Scotland  has  always  been 
solid  in  Calvinism,  but  the  solidity  is  not  so  thorough  as  it  seems. 
For  its  area,  Scotland  has  an  extraordinary  number  of  sects.  Its 
ecclesiastical  history  is  one  of  continual  division  and  animosity. 
Taken  numerically,  Presbyterianism  has  always  bulked  more 
largely  than  any  other  sect,  but  it  has  been  split  up  into  sections 
more  numerous  and  various  than  would  have  been  thought 
possible. 

Schisms  and  reunions  make  up  the  perplexing  tale,  and  even  yet 
there  are  six  sections  of  Presbyterians  in  existence.  The  old  clan 
disputes  seem  to  have  been  transformed  into  sectarian  strife.  The 
wrangle  over  territory  which  disturbed  the  straths  and  carses  changed 
into  discussion  over  dogmas  in  presbyteries,  synods,  and  assemblies. 

The  Papacy,  which  was  thought  to  have  been  rooted  out,  grows 
apace.  Episcopacy  flourishes,  Congregationalism  is  lively,  Metho- 
dists, Baptists,  and  scores  of  other  sects  thrive  wondrously. 

It  is  true  that  most  of  these  sects  have  a  professed  theology  of  a 
Calvinistic  character,  so  that  it  appears  as  if  Scotland  were  really 
Calvinistic.     But  the  Confession  of  Faith  does  not  show  the  present 


196 

faith  of  Scotland,  nor  do  the  traditional  articles  of  the  Congrega- 
tional bodies  express  their  actual  belief. 

The  United  Free  Church  has  declared  several  explicit  modifica- 
tions of  its  standard,  and  there  are  more  undeclared. 

The  Established  Church  has  reviewed  the  formulas  of  subscrip- 
tion, and  proposed  a  radical  alteration.  Neither  of  these  churches 
is  Calvinistic  in  the  old  sense,  nor  perhaps  in  any  sense.  The  old 
position  of  absolute  dogmatism  is  virtually  surrendered.  Prosecu- 
tions for  heresy  have  practically  ceased.  They  have  proved  to  be 
suicidal.  The  most  learned,  earnest,  and  advanced  men  are  the 
heretics,  and  no  Church  can  afford  to  sacrifice  them. 

How  to  get  themselves  out  of  the  dilemma  of  trusts  legally  held 
for  Calvinism,  when  the  ism  is  dissolved,  is  the  puzzle  now  before 
the  two  leading  bodies  of  Presbyterians,  and  it  presses  on  the  other 
bound  sects  also. 

The  social  condition  of  the  Scots  has  changed  slowly  and  without 
convulsion. 

There  is  still  a  large  proportion  of  the  population  in  villages  and 
engaged  in  agriculture.  The  Highlands  retain  their  peculiarities 
with  but  little  change,  save  that  Gaelic  is  fading  out. 

There  have  been  transformations  of  industries  in  the  Lowlands 
caused  by  the  introduction  of  machinery,  but  they  have  gone  on 
quietly.  The  growth  of  cities  has  been  gradual,  and  is  against 
concern  for  theology  rather  than  for  it. 

Any  genuine  Calvinism  there  is  now  in  Scotland  thrives  grimly 
around  the  Highland  moors  and  along  the  lonely  shores  of  the 
islands.  The  recent  disruption  of  the  old  Free  Church  was  practi- 
cally a  rupture  between  its  Highland  and  its  Lowland  elements. 
Of  the  190  congregations  of  the  "Wee  Frees"  reported  as  organized 
(or  being  organized),  no  less  than  144  lie  within  what  may  be  called 
the  Highland  belt  of  religion.  So  are  104  of  the  120  buildings 
actually  in  their  possession.  Subscription  to  the  Confession  of  Faith 
in  the  strict  sense  is  now  a  Highland  peculiarity,  a  Celtic  phenomenon. 

Within  the  sects  themselves  many  reasons  may  be  found  for  the 
retention  of  professed  belief  in  Calvinism.  It  was  supposed  to 
have  under  it  the  warrant  of  God's  infallible  word  and  to  be  per- 
meated with  the  spirit  of  truth.  The  piety  of  the  fathers  stood 
sponsor  for  it,  the  believing  experience  of  tried  souls  supported  it, 


i97 

and  the  interests  of  the  Church  required  its  maintenance.  It  was 
promoted  and  protected  by  all  the  forces  of  religious  authority.  And 
the  sects  were  so  much  occupied  with  ecclesiastical  polities  that 
they  had  no  room  for  doctrinal  considerations.  Most  of  the  divi- 
sions have  been  over  the  administration  of  affairs,  State  relations, 
and  diplomacies.  The  remoteness  of  Scotland  from  continental  life, 
its  insularity  and  air  of  independence,  helped  to  preserve  the  cake 
of  belief  from  breakage. 

The  Church  erected  a  wall  of  defence  around  its  dogmas,  and 
made  it  profanity  to  touch  them  in  any  critical  way.  And  so  the 
confession  stands  in  history  as  an  example  of  hermetical  sealing  up 
of  formal  theology,  an  instance  of  the  mummification  of  a  creed. 

The  Professor  of  Divinity  in  Aberdeen  University  put  the  case 
accurately  in  his  address  to  students  at  the  close  of  the  session  in 
March  last.  He  said,  "The  attempt  to  rear  the  fabric  of  our  holy 
faith  upon  a  single  exclusive  type  of  elaborated  doctrine  has  failed, 
and  the  world  is  littered  with  the  ddbris  of  ecclesiastical  strife  still 
cherished  by  too  many  with  antiquarian  fondness." 

The  Standards  now  are  felt  to  be  a  dead  weight,  and  all  the  re- 
sources of  law  and  piety  are  being  brought  to  bear  upon  the  problem 
of  their  decent  disposal.  The  decision  of  the  House  of  Lords,  in 
case  of  the  Free  Church  of  Scotland  appeals,  has  brought  the  Con- 
fessional and  other  churches  to  the  dread  alternatives  of  adhering 
strictly  to  the  creeds  or  of  altering  or  discarding  them.  They  cannot 
profess  the  creeds  in  the  primitive  sense,  and  to  alter  or  discard  them 
would  require  a  remodelling  of  trusts. 

The  crisis  is  serious  and  severe,  and  calls  for  the  wisdom  which 
is  from  above.  The  reconstruction  of  subscription  and  of  trusts 
will  delay  the  required  reformation  of  theology  to  follow  the  renas- 
cence of  Biblical  scholarship  and  wide  theological  culture,  but  that 
higher  work  will  have  to  be  done.  The  men  for  it  are  in  the  making, 
and  the  necessity  for  it  will  eventuate  it.  The  consciousness  has 
come  to  the  soul  of  Scotland,  after  being  for  two  hundred  and  fifty 
years  like  a  fountain  sealed,  that  theology  cannot  have  health  and 
truth  except  it  is  in  contact  with  spiritual  energies  that  make  for 
development.  The  thistle  is  stubborn,  but  will  at  last  "break  into 
glossy  purples,  which  out-redden  all  voluptuous  garden  roses."  In 
that  day  the  repentant    Scot,   leaving  his  vain   dogmas,  will    say, 


198 

with  a  fervor  more  radiant  than  that  of  our  poet  and  altering  his 
words  a  little: — 

"All  hail,  Religion!  maid  divine! 

I  join  with  those 
Who  boldly  dare  thy  cause  maintain 

In  spite  of  foes, 
In  spite  of  creeds  of  olden  time. 
In  spite  of  black  dogmatic  grime, 
In  spite  of  bigotry's  long  crime, 

Thy  worth  and  merit 
At  last  will  brightly,  purely  shine 

With  Freedom's  spirit." 


The  Congress  adjourned  to  meet  at  8  p.m.  in  the  Old  South 
Church. 


199 


FOURTH  GENERAL  SESSION  OF  THE  INTER- 
NATIONAL CONGRESS. 

Held  in  the  Old  South  Congregational  Church,  corner  Boylston 
and  Dartmouth  Streets,  at  8  p.m.,  Wednesday,  September  25th, 
Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D.,  presiding.  Religious  services  were 
conducted  by  Rev.  Dr.  Gordon.  The  music  was  by  the  choir  of 
the  Old  South  Church. 

The  Chairman  introduced  successively  the  three  speakers  of 
the  evening,  Rev.  L.  E.  T.  Andre,  D.D.,  pastor  of  the  Evangelical 
Church  of  Florence,  Italy,  Professor  A.  Gaston  Bonet-Maury,  D.D., 
of  the  University  of  Paris,  and  Abbe*  A.  Houtin,  of  Paris,  whose 
papers  are  printed  below: — 


200 


MODERNISM   AND    MODERNISTS   IN  ITALY. 
A  Study  of  the  Present  Situation  of  Catholicism. 

BY  REV.  L.  E.  TONY  ANDRES,  D.D.,  FLORENCE,  ITALY. 
I. 

Italy  is  essentially  a  Catholic  country.  Out  of  the  32,475,253 
inhabitants  enumerated  at  the  census  of  1901,  31,539,863  declared 
themselves  Catholics;  that  is,  97.12  per  cent,  of  the  population. 
All  told,  there  were  only  65,595  Protestants,  20,538  of  whom  were 
foreigners. 

But,  if  the  number  of  Catholics  is  so  imposing,  it  does  not  follow 
that  they  are  all  fervent  and  active  in  religious  practice.  It  is  a  sig- 
nificant fact  that  at  the  time  of  this  very  census  795,276  persons 
were  unwilling  to  say  to  what  religion  they  belonged,  and  36,092 
declared  they  were  of  no  religion.  And  how  many  others  made  a 
profession  of  Catholicism  merely  as  a  matter  of  form! 

"The  Italians,"  says  Signor  G.  S.  Gargano  in  the  Marzocco,  an 
important  literary  weekly  paper  published  in  Florence,  "are  not  a 
religious  people  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word.  With  us  religion  is, 
for  the  most  part,  either  the  outcome  of  habits  contracted  ever  since 
childhood  ...  or  it  springs  from  the  conviction  that  we  may  find  in 
it  a  means  of  defence  against  those  forces  that  tend  to  overthrow  the 
established  order  of  things.  .  .  .  There  are  but  few  to  whom  the  sense 
of  religion  is  a  purely  personal  fact.  .  .  .  Religion,  in  Italy,  is  never 
disassociated  from  what  we  ordinarily  call  clericalism,  .  .  .  and  cler- 
icalism has  nothing  to  do  with  faith."     (No.  22,  June  2,  1907.) 

What  are  the  causes  of  this  indifference  to  religion  that  has  become 
so  marked  in  our  time,  or,  should  I  not  rather  say,  that  has  dared 
to  declare  itself  so  openly  ? 

There  are  several,  and  they  affect  all  classes  of  society.  In  all 
countries,  as  well  as  in  all  denominations,  many  reject  religion 


201 

because  it  prescribes  their  duties.  But  this  cause  of  indifference  is 
foreign  to  my  subject.  The  same  may  be  said  of  others  of  a  like 
kind  which  I  shall  not  mention  further.  I  would  here  consider  only 
those  of  upright  conscience.  Moreover,  I  shall  limit  myself  to  those 
causes  that  are  peculiar  to  Italy,  or  which,  while  passing  beyond  its 
frontiers,  are  more  strongly  felt  in  the  peninsula. 

i.  The  first  cause  to  be  noted  is  a  political  one.  From  1849  to  1870 
Italy  fought  for  independence  and  unity  with  all  the  ardor  that 
springs  from  a  high  sense  of  patriotism.  This  great  movement  was 
led  by  men  of  religious  mind.  But  the  Church,  altogether  unwilling 
to  renounce  her  claim  to  temporal  power,  set  herself  in  all  her  might 
against  the  national  ideals.  Nothing  more  was  required  to  alienate 
from  her  the  hearts  of  all  those  who  deemed,  and  rightly,  too,  that 
religion  should  consecrate  and  encourage  the  love  of  one's  country. 
On  the  20th  of  September,  1870,  the  Italian  armies  entered  Rome. 
The  Vatican  might  then  have  yielded  to  the  national  pressure  and 
have  accepted  the  situation.  But  the  Vatican  never  disarmed. 
To  the  present  day  it  persists  in  its  ancient  claims.  And  more  than 
this,  so  that  there  shall  be  no  mistaking  its  attitude,  it  has  forbidden 
Catholics  to  take  part  in  the  elections  and  administration  of  the 
■country;  for  to  do  so  would  be  to  make  themselves  accomplices  in 
the  usurpation.  And,  if  at  times  the  Vatican  has  suspended  the  non 
expedit,  it  has  not  been  with  a  view  to  the  advantage  of  Italy,  it  has 
been  in  the  hope  of  securing  victories  for  the  clerical  party  who  are 
adversaries  of  the  government, — a  proceeding  certainly  not  calcu- 
lated to  gain  friends  for  the  Church. 

2.  After  having  alienated  the  patriots  from  herself,  the  Church 
alienated  the  proletariat.  She  began  by  withdrawing  her  interest  in 
social  questions.  But,  urged  forward  by  the  socialists,  these  ques- 
tions succeeded  in  commanding  attention.  The  Church  then  learned 
to  fear  socialists,  to  fear  their  programme  and  their  earlier  success; 
and,  in  order  to  put  a  stop  to  the  movement,  she  forbade  Catholics 
to  engage  in  social  questions  independently  of  her  guidance.  "Let 
no  one  undertake  anything,  either  against  or  without  the  will  of  the 
bishop,"  wrote  the  Cardinal  Secretary  of  State.  The  Congregation 
des  Affaires  Extraordinaires  went  further:  "Individuals,  as  well  as 
society,  before  acting  upon  any  decision  whatever,  owe  a  full  and 
entire  obedience  to  the  authority  of  the  bishops"  (Unitd,  Cattolica, 


202 

No.  50,  March  1,  1907).  The  proletariat  saw  that  the  Church  inter- 
vened in  order  to  paralyze  their  efforts,  not  to  bring  about  the  tri- 
umph of  justice:  they  drew  aloof,  then,  from  the  priests  and  allowed 
themselves  to  be  borne  away  in  the  current  of  anti-religious  doc- 
trines. In  the  priest  (anti-democrat)  they  beheld  a  dangerous 
adversary,  and  in  religion  itself  they  saw  an  enemy  that  must  be 
fought. 

3.  The  third  cause  is  scientific.  The  Church  dreads  the  free 
researches  of  the  human  mind,  and  disapproves  of  such  conclusions 
as  do  not  agree  with  the  old  affirmations  which  an  impartial  science 
has  recognized  as  false.  It  is,  above  all,  in  the  region  of  religious 
criticism  that  the  Church  is  intolerant.  Now  religious  criticism 
touches  upon  a  crowd  of  problems  scientific  in  the  strict  sense  of 
the  word,  historical,  psychological,  etc.  Learned  men  of  all  kinds 
are  shocked  at  the  pretensions  of  the  Vatican,  and  cannot  do  other- 
wise than  forsake  a  doctrine  coming  from  a  Church  that  will  not 
open  her  eyes,  and  that  denies  the  right  of  a  free  examination,  lest  her 
own  system  should  be  disturbed.  It  is  but  natural  that  one  should 
mistrust  those  who  fear  the  light  and  the  inquiry  of  proofs. 

4.  In  the  fourth  place  the  Church  is  upbraided  for  her  incapacity 
to  satisfy  the  aspirations  of  modem  consciences,  when,  tormented  by 
doubt,  they  come  to  her  asking  for  light  to  restore  their  faith.  The 
Church,  faithful  to  the  apologetic  method  of  the  Middle  Ages,  does 
not  perceive  that  the  arguments  furnished  by  the  scholastic  are  mean- 
ingless at  this  day, — not  only,  indeed,  neither  persuading  nor  con- 
verting, but  calling  forth  smiles,  and  estranging  souls  more  and 
more  from  a  religion  which  justifies  and  defends  itself  so  poorly. 

5.  A  fifth  cause  of  discredit  is  to  be  found  in  the  numerous  and 
frequently  gross  superstitions  upheld  and  propagated  by  the  Church, — 
the  worship  of  relics;  minor  devotions  to  the  Virgin,  under  numerous 
titles;  petitions  to  the  less  authentic  saints,  male  and  female,  such 
as  Saint  Expedit  and  Saint  Philomena;  three  and  nine  days'  devo- 
tions, religious  festivals,  centenaries,  pilgrimages,  etc.  This  super- 
stitious formalism  disgusts  all  those  who  feel  within  their  souls  the 
need  of  a  close  communion  with  God,  and  to  whom  it  appears  that 
the  clergy  themselves  are  imbued  with  the  superstitions  they  uphold. 

"The  Church  is  ill,"  says  Senator  Fogazzaro  in  "The  Saint." 
"Four  evil  spirits  have  entered  into  her  body,  there  to  make  war 


203 

with  the  Holy  Ghost"  (p.  336).  They  are:  the  spirit  of  falsehood 
(P-  336);  the  spirit  of  domination  (p.  339);  the  spirit  of  avarice 
(p.  341);  and  the  spirit  of  immobility  (p.  342).  "The  Catholic 
Church,  who  calls  herself  the  source  of  truth,  sets  herself  to-day 
against  the  search  after  truth  when  it  affects  her  foundations,  the  sa- 
cred books,  the  formulae  of  her  dogmas,  or  her  alleged  infallibility. 
To  us  this  means  she  no  longer  has  faith  in  herself.  The  Catholic 
Church,  who  calls  herself  the  channel  of  life,  to-day  restrains  and 
stifles  all  the  youthful  life  within  her,  to-day  she  props  up  all  that 
is  tottering  and  aged  within  her.  To  us  this  means  her  death, 
remote,  but  inevitable,  death.  The  Catholic  Church,  which  proclaims 
the  wish  to  renew  all  things  in  Christ,  is  hostile  to  us  because  we  would 
contend  with  the  enemies  of  Christ  for  the  guidance  of  social  progress. 
To  us  this,  with  many  other  things,  means  that  she  has  Christ 
upon  her  lips,  but  not  within  her  heart"  (p.  290). 

This  is  why,  day  by  day,  Catholics  become  more  and  more  es- 
tranged from  their  Church.  Many  who  still  bear  the  name  of 
Catholic  have  no  longer  any  faith  in  the  Church,  and  no  longer 
practise  Catholicism. 

Good  and  gifted  men,  moved  at  this  spectacle,  are  endeavoring 
to  lead  their  generation  back  to  a  religious  life  either  by  urging  re- 
forms or  in  spreading  abroad  a  reawakening  spirit  in  all  the  mani- 
festations of  modern  life,  that  shall  be  in  harmony  with  the  spirit 
of  modern  times,  hence  the  name  Modernists  which  has  been  given 
them. 

Reformers  there  have  always  been  in  the  Catholic  Church,  although 
their  pious  desires  have  been  quickly  stifled.  Some  have  wished 
to  reform  with  the  pope,  some  without  the  pope,  and  others  in 
opposition  to  the  pope.  The  Modernists  come  under  the  first  cate- 
gory. They  would  have  the  pope  adopt  and  decree  the  reforms 
they  suggest. 

Their  immediate  precursors,  in  Italy,  were  Rosmini  and  Gioberti, 
two  great  reformers  of  the  Catholic  form  of  worship  and  hierarchy. 

The  Modernists,  however,  have  not  all  the  same  programme. 
Some  are  more  radical,  others  more  mystic:  some  have  a  clearly 
defined  programme  of  reform,  others  simply  desire  to  sow  ideas  in 
the  minds  of  an  intellectual  elite  of  ecclesiastics  and  laymen, — that 


204 

is  to  say,  they  wish  to  prepare  opinion  and  await  the  time  when, 
as  a  result,  they  shall  see  the  reforms  take  place  naturally  in  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  events.  Some  busy  themselves  with  one  special  ques- 
tion,— e.g.,  the  social  question,  or  the  rights  of  science,  or  the  moral 
and  mystic  aspirations  of  the  human  soul, — others  would  attack  all 
questions  at  one  and  the  same  time.  I  will  say,  further,  that  a 
number  of  aspirations  are  marked  by  a  certain  vagueness,  and, 
indeed,  one  may  note  in  them  contradictions  and  some  want  of  logic. 
But,  however  that  may  be,  Modernism  is  a  noble  movement  that 
has  a  claim  upon  all  our  attention  and  sympathy.  Men  who  fight 
for  a  religious  life  and  freedom  of  thought  cannot  but  win  the  sym- 
pathy of  us  liberal  and  non-conforming  Christians  who  have  been 
called  upon  to  make  our  sacrifices  for  the  triumph  of  the  freedom  of 
thought  and  free  communion  with  our  heavenly  Father. 

If  the  variety  of  individual  opinions  is  great  and  if  it  is  difficult 
to  classify  them,  there  are  amongst  them,  however,  some  that  are 
more  or  less  common  to  the  majority  of  Modernists.  These  opinions 
I  will  endeavor  to  recapitulate. 

Generally  speaking,  the  Modernists  naturally  wish  to  remedy  the 
evils  from  which  the  Church  is  suffering  by  removing  the  causes  of 
discredit  that  I  have  enumerated.  In  other  words,  the  Modernists 
wish  to  have  a  religion  conformable  to  present  needs  and  contem- 
porary thought.  Such  was  the  desire  of  the  Church  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  she  acted  accordingly;  and  the  methods  which  to-day  are 
old  at  that  time  constituted  a  veritable  progress,  since  they  brought 
religion  into  harmony  with  the  degree  of  the  nation's  culture.  It 
would  be  sufficient  now,  say  the  Modernists,  to  take  up  and  continue 
the  work  of  the  past,  following  the  same  principle  of  adaptation. 

I  shall  here  note  three  kinds  of  Modernists: — 

(a)  First,  those  who  have  in  view  political  and  social  questions, 
scarcely  at  all  disturbing  themselves  about  dogmas  and  religious 
opinions. 

(b)  Those  especially  interested  in  the  search  after  truth  through 
science  and  religious  criticism. 

(c)  The  mystics  who  desire  reforms  more  strictly  religious  and 
pertaining  to  the  forms  of  worship. 

I  would  observe,  however,  that  this  subdivision  is  somewhat 
artificial,  for  the  same  individuals  fall  sometimes  under  two  of  these 


205 

heads,  sometimes  even  under  all  three.    The  most  distinct  of  these 
classes  is  the  first. 

II. 

Politico-social  Modernists. 

In  their  attitude  towards  the  state  and  society  what  the  Modern- 
ists demand  is:  the  abandonment  of  the  "Roman  question";  liberty 
to  vote;  the  separation,  if  not  of  Church  and  State,  at  least  of  the 
interests  of  the  Church  and  those  of  the  State;  and  autonomy, — that 
is,  freedom  to  act  in  society  without  seeking  counsel  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical authorities. 

i.  I  have  put  the  "Roman  question"  first.  The  Modernists  will 
no  longer  hear  of  it.  A  bishop  who  was  interviewed  said  to  the 
representative  of  the  Rassegna  Nazionale  (November  16,  1904): 
"Temporal  power  is  gone  forever.  It  is  buried.  Do  not  let  us  dis- 
turb the  tomb.  It  is  wishing  for  the  impossible  to  wish  it  even  in  a 
small  degree,  and  whoever  wishes  for  the  impossible  is  a  fool." 

I  do  not  know  the  name  of  the  bishop  interviewed,  but  Monsignor 
Bonomelli,  bishop  of  Cremona,  is  of  about  the  same  opinion  {Unitb, 
Cattolica,  No.  62,  March  15,  1907). 

I  will  not  make  further  quotations.  Innumerable  articles  advise 
the  Church  to  accept  what  is  accomplished,  and  to  recognize  without 
restriction  the  royal  government  of  United  Italy. 

2.  The  liberty  of  taking  part  in  the  elections  and  administration  of 
the  country  is  less  urgently  insisted  upon.  Not  that  the  Modernists 
are  less  desirous  of  it,  but  since  numerous  electors  have  formed 
the  habit  of  doing  without  the  permission  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authority,  and  act  as  if  the  non  expedit  no  longer  existed.  Besides, 
the  non  expedit  would  disappear  with  the  disappearance  of  the 
Roman  question. 

3.  With  regard  to  recent  events  in  France  the  bishop  of  Cremona, 
of  whom  I  have  already  spoken,  has  pronounced  himself  in  favor 
of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State.  Don  Romolo  Murri  is  of 
almost  the  same  opinion,  though  he  does  not  go  so  far.  The  prin- 
ciple of  the  Modernists  is,  in  fact,  "  to  render  unto  Caesar  the  things 
that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's";  and  what 
the  Modernists  desire  above  all  is  that  the  Church  should  no  longer 


206 

interfere  with  political  questions,  nor  the  State  in  ecclesiastical 
matters. 

4.  Lastly,  the  Modernists  demand  autonomy.  Catholics,  they 
say,  depend  upon  ecclesiastical  authority  with  regard  to  dogma  and 
ethics;  but,  as  regards  all  that  which  is  neither  dogma  nor  ethics, 
they  should  be  their  own  masters,  free  from  the  interference  of  either 
priest  or  bishop  or  pope.  As  citizens,  then,  Catholics  may  think, 
speak,  and  work  independently  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  engage, 
as  seems  good  to  them,  in  everything  that  concerns  the  civil,  political, 
economic,  and  social  life  of  the  country. 

These  are  especially  the  claims  of  the  "Christian  Democrats." 
They  are  socialists:  their  programme  and  their  claims  are  those  of 
the  proletariat,  with  the  exception  of  one  important  point.  The 
Italian  socialists  are  atheists.  The  Christian  Democrats  remain 
Christians  (Catholic)  as  their  name  indicates,  and  consequently,  if 
they  speak  to  the  proletariats  of  their  rights,  if  they,  indeed,  insist 
upon  them,  they  also  recall  to  them  their  duties.  For  Christian 
democracy  is  animated  by  a  spirit  of  order  and  equity,  in  spite  of 
the  confusion  and  vagueness  that  still  envelop  many  points. 

This  movement,  whose  great  apostle  is  Don  Murri,  the  Vatican 
endeavored  to  monopolize  and  direct  at  its  own  pleasure.  But  the 
Christian  Democrats  claimed  to  be  free.  Hence  the  conflict  with 
the  ecclesiastical  authority  which  disputes  their  right  either  to  act 
or  to  bear  the  name  of  Christian  if  they  do  not  submit  to  the  bishop 
of  the  diocese.* 

But  how  are  these  many  politico-social  reforms  to  be  brought  about? 
The  Modernists  are  of  opinion  that  there  must  first  take  place  a 
transformation  and  a  purification  in  the  government  and  adminis- 
tration of  the  Church.  The  Church  is  too  monarchical.  She  must 
abandon  her  old  system  of  coercion.  Let  her  recognize  episcopal 
autonomy,  the  right  of  laymen  to  religious  initiative  and  activity. 
More  than  all,  she  should  make  better  choice  of  her  priests,  not 
choosing  priests  trained  to  submission,  but  upright  and  moral  priests, 
conversant  with  the  needs  and  aspirations  of  modern  society.  Lastly, 
in  order  to  remove  causes  tending  to  a  conflict  with  Italy,  the  number 
of  foreign  cardinals  must  be  increased,  while  that  of  Italian  cardinals 
is  as  much  diminished.     To  do  away  with  the  crushing  numerical 

*  At  present  many  have  taken  the  name  of  "National  Democrats." 


207 

preponderance  of  the  Italian  cardinals  is  the  only  means  of  rendering 
the  Holy  See  independent  of  local  circumstances.  Not  to  mention 
that  foreign  cardinals  are  more  favorable  to  progress  than  the  Italian 
cardinals. 

III. 

Scientific  Modernists. 

Let  us  now  pass  on  to  the  second  class  of  Modernists,  those  who 
are  theologians  or  learned  men,  who  demand  the  recognition  of  the 
rights  of  science  in  the  realm  of  religion  as  in  all  other  realms. 

They  desire,  firstly,  to  assert  this  right  in  Biblical  criticism.  "  The 
Bible,  they  say,  should  be  studied  in  the  same  manner  as  all  other 
sacred  and  profane  books  of  antiquity"  ("A  Pio  X.,"  p.  n).  Re- 
garding the  New  Testament,  here  is  a  statement  of  the  manner  of 
criticising  taken  from  an  anonymous  brochure,  "Letter  to  Pius  X.," 
which  appeared  four  months  ago:  "The  religion  of  Israel  belongs 
to  us  but  indirectly.  To-day  we  are  Christians,  and  our  civilization 
is  Christian;  but,  before  becoming  Christians,  we  belonged  to  the 
Graeco-Roman  civilization,  and,  if  Christianity  is  the  fulfilment  of 
the  religion  of  Israel,  it  had,  however,  in  order  to  become  our  religion, 
to  transform  itself  by  assimilating  Oriental  civilization  and  becoming 
Graeco-Roman.  As  a  result  of  this,  after  we  have  accepted  the  Old 
Testament,  there  still  remains  a  great  work  to  be  done.  Not  only 
must  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  be  submitted  to  criticism, 
but  the  relation  they  bear  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
to  the  Graeco-Roman  civilization  must  be  studied.  Only  then  shall 
we  be  able  to  comprehend  what  was  originally  the  spirit  of  the  Chris- 
tian civilization,  what  were  its  primitive  and  authentic  elements, 
what  those  that  were  borrowed  from  the  religion  of  Israel  and  those 
that  were  due  to  the  Greek  civilization."     ("A  Pio  X.,"  p.  12.) 

But  the  Modernists  deem  that  the  Bible  is  insufficient  to  reveal 
all  the  aspects  of  truth,  and  to  the  critical  study  of  the  texts  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments  they  would  add  the  study  of  the  history 
of  religions. 

Lastly,  the  Modernists  attach  a  great  importance  to  the  study  of 
psychology  and  its  free  and  sincere  application  in  the  realm  of 
religion. 


208 

Let  us  enter  into  some  details. 

The  following  are  some  of  the  interesting  conclusions  the  Mod- 
ernists have  reached: — 

i.  The  evolution  of  revelation.  Religious  consciousness,  which  at 
first  manifested  itself  in  mankind  under  superstitious  and  imperfect 
forms,  rose  little  by  little  to  forms  that  were  purer,  and  in  Christi- 
anity revelation  reached  its  highest  point. 

2.  Nevertheless,  some  good  is  to  be  recognized  in  other  religions. 
They,  too,  are  revelations  from  God  to  the  human  soul,  as  was 
recognized  long  ago  by  the  Apostle  Paul. 

3.  Revelation  is  not  a  communication  of  truth  directly  made  by 
God  to  man  at  one  given  time  and  by  outward  means.  It  is  a  psy- 
chological revelation  that  has  its  seat  in  the  human  soul,  and  which 
arises  from  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  vivid  personal  religious 
experiences. 

4.  We  are  to  learn  how  to  distinguish  between  religious  truth  and 
the  forms  in  which  it  is  contained.  The  ancients  succeeded  in  form- 
ing for  themselves  a  certain  idea  of  God  and  man's  relation  to  him, — 
a  conception  which  corresponds  to  no  reality  in  our  days.  Formerly, 
mankind  loved  the  supernatural,  and  God  appeared  great  through 
the  miraculous.  Nowadays,  on  the  contrary,  the  divine  majesty  is 
felt  in  the  contemplation  of  the  wonderful  and  immutable  laws  of 
the  world.  Thus  it  is  to  take  a  step  in  advance  (while  still  remaining 
faithful  to  the  spiritof  religious  truth),  to  detach  it  from  those  transient 
forms  with  which  it  has  been  clothed  in  the  past.  If  the  recitals  of 
the  creation,  the  fall,  and  the  deluge,  to  cite  some  instances,  are 
legendary,  and  not  historical,  they  none  the  less  retain  all  their  moral 
signification  and  their  psychological  character. 

5.  The  evolution  of  faith,  for  this  is  co-ordinate  with  the  intellectua 
and  moral  evolution  of  man.  All  that  is  spiritual  in  man  is  closely 
united;  and,  when  one  part  of  his  spiritual  being  develops,  all  the 
rest  does  so  to  the  same  degree. 

6.  Then,  the  evolution  of  dogma,  which  is  the  expression  of  faith, 
must  also  be  admitted.  Father  Semeria,  a  learned  Barnabite,  has 
said,  "The  thought  of  God  can  only  become  dogma  by  becoming 
incarnate — let  the  expression  pass — in  the  mind  of  man"  ("Dogma," 
gerarchia,  p.  54).  "No  human  thought,  however  divine  may  be  it& 
import,  can  remain  immobile"  (op.  cit.,  p.  96). 


209 

7.  If  all  religions  contain  divine  elements,  the  Catholic  Church 
has  no  right  to  shut  out  from  heaven  those  who  profess  other  religions. 

8.  More  than  this,  the  Church  should  not  be  offended  at  an  impure 
or  imperfect  faith  within  her  own  pale  where  there  is  a  pure  life  and 
an  upright  conscience  (cf.  Fogazzaro,  op.  cit.,  p.  465). 

9.  The  dogma  of  eternal  punishment  is  contrary  to  the  idea  of 
divine  goodness  and  justice. 

10.  Lastly,  theology  can  be  identified  neither  with  scholasticism 
nor  with  Christianity,  nor  with  dogma.  It  is  the  systemizing  of  the 
various  interpretations  of  faith  throughout  the  centuries.  It  may 
therefore  be  still  further  changed  by  assimilating  contemporary 
culture.  Still  more,  it  is  necessary  that  it  should  change  if  it  is  to 
satisfy  the  needs  of  modern  consciences.  To-day,  in  order  to  con- 
vince men  and  reanimate  their  faith,  the  worn-out  arguments  of  the 
Middle  Ages  must  be  abandoned,  and  a  new  language,  simple  and 
intelligible,  found.  This  new  language,  which  would  be  embodied 
in  a  new  apologetics,  cannot  be  otherwise  than  penetrated  by  a  scien- 
tific spirit.  The  anonymous  brochure  from  which  I  have  already 
quoted  affords  two  examples  of  this.  To-day,  we  read  (p.  16),  in 
order  to  explain  the  nature  of  the  Trinity,  it  is  impossible  to  have 
recourse  to  the  ontologic  terminology  of  scholasticism.  The  words 
"essence,"  "nature,"  "hypostasis,"  mean  nothing  to  modern  minds. 
Let  us  separate,  however,  the  religious  signification  from  the  dogma, 
God  is  Father,  Love,  Wisdom,  and  this  we  understand.  Similarly 
(pp.  16,  17)  we  do  not  admit  the  traditional  theory  of  transub- 
stantiation,  in  order  to  explain  the  mystery  of  the  eucharist.  It  is 
through  faith  that  the  faithful  are  brought  into  contact  with  the 
real,  living  Christ. 

These  liberties  that  we  take,  add  the  Modernists,  are  those  that 
the  Fathers  of  the  Church  have  taken  before  us.  Thus  we  are  their 
true  continuators.  A  continuator  is  not  an  imitator  or  a  copyist. 
To  continue  is  to  enter  into  the  spirit  of  one's  predecessors,  to  con- 
sider their  work  in  connection  with  the  degree  of  culture  belonging 
to  their  times.  We  have  the  right,  therefore,  to  reject  many  of  their 
opinions,  seeing  that  since  their  day  the  times  have  changed. 

Identical  reasons  prevent  us  from  believing  the  modern  legends 
of  Saint  Expedit  and  Saint  Philomena,  etc.,  and  such  assertions  as 
that  of  Cardinal  Cavallari,  that  the  Apostle  Saint  Mark  was  the  first 


2IO 

bishop  of  Venice  (Osservatore  Romano,  No.  91,  April,  1907),  or  that 
of  the  present  pope,  in  his  encyclical  of  the  27th  of  October,  1904, 
"  The  Hebrew  patriarchs  believed  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception." 

IV. 

Mystic  Modernists. 

The  Modernists  of  the  third  category  are  preoccupied  neither  with 
social  questions  nor  politics,  nor  theology.  They  call  for  a  reform 
in  Christian  life  and  in  the  forms  of  worship.  Of  such  is  Senator 
Fogazzaro  in  "The  Saint,"  and  many  other  men  less  well  known, 
not  to  mention  women,  of  whom  there  is  in  fact  a  greater  number. 
These  Modernists  are  reproached  with  being  neither  theologians 
nor  historians,  nor  exegetes.  And  so  much  the  better,  if  the  charge 
is  true.  Their  voice  is  that  springing  from  the  conscience  and  the 
heart,  it  is  that  of  humble  believers  thirsting  for  divine  communion, 
that  of  true,  sincere  worshippers  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  that  of  men 
who  desire  above  all  to  realize  a  truly  active  Christian  life.  And 
these  souls,  it  seems  to  me,  have  every  right  to  make  their  wishes 
known.  They  do  not  see  in  the  Church  simply  a  hierarchy.  It  is 
in  their  eyes  a  universal  community  of  the  faithful,  and  they  believe 
that  from  the  depths  of  every  Christian  heart  the  living  water  of  truth 
may  spring  up  (cf.  Fogazzaro,  op.  cit.,  p.  291). 

1.  What  such  souls  long  for  more  than  all  is  an  actively  Christian 
life  in  conformity  with  the  gospel  and  more  especially  with  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount. 

They  desire,  so  we  read  in  "The  Saint,"  a  great  moral  task,  the 
return  of  believers  to  the  practice  of  evangelic  teachings  (p.  71, 
cf.  p.  195);  for  Christianity  consists,  above  all,  in  living  and  acting 
according  to  the  spirit  of  Christ  (p.  276).  The  Master  cares  little 
for  a  multitude  of  words.  What  he  desires,  rather,  is  to  be  served 
faithfully  and  in  silence,  our  minds  fixed  always  on  his  will  (p.  220). 
For,  indeed,  the  supreme  purpose  of  human  creatures  is  to  glorify 
their  heavenly  Father.  They  that  glorify  him  are  they  that  have 
the  spirit  of  charity,  of  peace,  of  wisdom,  of  poverty,  of  purity,  and 
of  fortitude,  they  that  employ  their  vital  energy  for  the  welfare  of 
their  brethren  (cf.  p.  295). 


211 

"We  desire,"  adds  Don  Romolo  Murri,  "a  purer,  more  intense, 
more  practical,  more  Christian  Christianity,  more  in  conformity  with 
its  origin  and,  above  all,  more  in  harmony  with  the  gospel"  (" Li- 
beria e  Cristianesimo,"  p.  8). 

2.  This  is  not  all.  The  Modernists  of  this  category,  both  men 
and  women  (the  women  perhaps  still  more  than  the  men),  demand 
a  reform  in  the  manner  of  worship.  The  present  forms  of  worship 
do  not  satisfy  their  consciences.  We  desire,  they  explain,  that 
Catholicism  should  be  freed  from  the  heavy  impediment  of  outward 
forms  and  devotions  that  uphold  superstition.*  We  want  more 
spirituality  and  the  practical  mysticism  that  appeals  to  and  feeds 
the  soul.    We  want  direct  communion  with  God. 

The  clergy,  we  read  in  "The  Saint,"  neglect  to  teach  the  people 
that  inward  and  spiritual  prayer  purifies  the  soul,  which  certain 
superstitions  cannot  do  other  than  corrupt.  .  .  .  These  priests  are 
ill-pleased  when  souls  communicate  directly  and  in  the  natural  way 
with  God,  going  to  him  for  counsel  and  direction.  .  .  .  They  them- 
selves wish  to  direct  these  souls,  in  the  character  of  mediators  (p.  339). 
.  .  .  But  we  desire  to  communicate  with  the  living  Christ  (cf.  pp.  67, 
68). 

But  how  is  a  reform  in  the  manner  of  worship  to  be  brought  about? 
It  must  be  begun,  say  the  Modernists,  by  a  reform  in  the  discipline 
of  the  clergy.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  necessary  (a)  first  to  make  a  reform 
in  the  system  of  recruiting  the  clergy  for  the  purpose  of  making  sure 
of  the  fitness  of  the  young  seminarists;  (6)  next,  the  seminaries, 
with  their  courses  of  study,  must  be  reformed,  so  as  to  send  forth 
well-informed  priests;  for  it  is  the  ignorant  clergy,  still  more  than 
the  Vatican,  that  keep  up  superstitions;  (c)  more  than  all,  there 
should  be  an  aim  to  form  priests  of  a  real,  living,  and  fruitful  faith 
and  perfectly  moral  life;  (d)  one  of  the  best  aids  to  a  moral  life  on 
the  part  of  the  clergy  would  be  the  suppression  of  celibacy;  (e)  lastly, 
the  reform  must  be  introduced  in  the  same  way  into  the  monastic 
orders;  for  monks  and  nuns,  especially  monks,  exercise,  no  less  than 
the  priests,  a  continual  influence  over  the  minds  of  the  faithful. 

*  Among  the  superstitions  that  have  been  most  severely  attacked  I  will  mention  that  of  the 
transfer  of  the  House  of  the  Virgin  to  Loretto,  near  Ancona. 


212 

V. 

Conclusion. 

Such  are  the  Modernists.  I  repeat  it,  they  are  not  all  of 
like  opinion,  nor  do  they  see  things  from  the  same  point  of  view. 
Some  are  preoccupied  above  all  with  the  relations  of  Church  and 
State  or  with  social  questions;  others  with  theology  and  science; 
others  with  the  ideal  of  a  religious  life;  and,  lastly,  others  who  interest 
themselves  in  all  these  questions  at  one  and  the  same  time.  And, 
whatever  may  be  their  purpose,  they  have  not  been  able  to  avoid  a 
certain  amount  of  vagueness,  and  even  certain  contradictions,  of 
which  I  have  not  here  treated.  But  what  is  there  astonishing  in 
this,  seeing  that  they  are  still  feeling  their  way  and  are  passing 
through  a  difficult  period  of  transition? 

I  have  said,  too,  that  the  Modernists  do  not  mean  to  leave  the 
Church  within  whose  pale  they  were  born.  I  reiterate  this  point. 
It  is  from  the  legitimate  authority  that  they  expect  these  reforms. 
They  wish  to  remain,  so  we  read  again  in  "The  Saint,"  "on  abso- 
lutely Catholic  ground,  looking  for  the  new  laws  from  the  old  authori- 
ties" (p.  66).  The  editors  of  the  Rinnovamento  (a  Modernist  peri- 
odical of  real  worth  published  at  Milan),  when  censured  by  Arch- 
bishop Ferrari,  replied  that,  though  they  should  not  cease  to  publish 
the  review,  they  did  not  any  the  less  cherish  "a  profound  love  for 
the  Catholic  Church  from  which  they  did  not  wish,  nor  could  they 
ever  bring  themselve: ,  to  separate"  (May,  1907,  p.  612).  There  is 
the  same  declaration  in  the  anonymous  pamphlet  from  which  I 
have  already  quoted:  "We  have  no  wish  to  be  rebellious  Catholics, 
but  sincere  Catholics,  desirous  of  saving  Christianity.  Our  rebellion 
is  at  most  the  force  that  a  loving  son  might  use  towards  his  sick 
mother  to  oblige  her  to  conform  with  medical  orders  indispensable 
to  her  health"  ("A  Pio  X.,"  p.  23).  "Everything  will  be  done  to 
rank  us  as  apostates,  but  we  shall  hold  firm  to  our  position,  ready  to 
endure  all,  to  sacrifice  all,  except  the  truth"  (loc.  cit.). 

This  resolution  has  disconcerted  the  pope  himself,  and  greatly 
irritated  him.  On  the  17th  of  April,  1907,  in  bestowing  the  cap  on 
the  new  cardinals,  Pius  X.  complained  of  the  Modernists  in  violent 
terms.  He  called  them  "sowers  of  tares,  apostles  of  monstrous 
heresies,  rebels."    In  the  recent  new  syllabus   that  appeared  two 


HENRY  W    WILBUR 
Philadelphia,  Penn. 


PRES.  FREDERICK  W.  HAMILTON,  D.D. 

Tufts  College 


REV.  J.  B.  WESTON,  D.D. 
Defiance,  Ohio 


DR.  JAMES  M.  WHITON 
New  York,  N.Y. 


'  of  rn 

iniversitv 


213 

months  ago  their  opinions  were  formally  condemned.  As  for  the 
clerical  party,  they  do  not  hide  their  anger  and  scorn.  The  pope 
only,  they  repeat,  may  suggest  reforms:  he  only  can  guide  the  con- 
sciences and  minds  of  men,  and  the  Modernists  who  pretend  to 
arrogate  unto  themselves  this  right,  and  yet  remain  Catholics,  are 
inconsistent.  They  are  dangerous  rebels,  wolves  in  sheep's  clothing. 
Modernism  is  an  octopus  of  a  thousand  tentacles  (Unith  Cattolica, 
No.  90,  April  19,  1907),  a  serpent  that  hides  itself,  in  order  to  be  more 
sure  of  inoculating  its  venom  (Osservatore  Romano,  No.  94,  April  ax, 
1907).  It  is  a  great  enemy  of  the  Church,  a  fatal  enemy,  more 
dangerous  than  socialism,  liberalism,  and  even  than  freemasonry 
(Unita  Cattolica,  No.  96,  April  26,  1907). 

These  expressions,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  will  give  you  a  feeble 
idea  of  the  numerous  attacks  to  which  the  Modernists  have  been 
exposed.  Censure,  espionage,  calumny,  low  and  vulgar  defamation, — 
such  are  the  ordinary  means,  they  say,  that  have  been  employed 
against  us  ("A  Pio  X.,"  pp.  21,  23).  We  are  attacked  in  the  news- 
papers, in  the  reviews,  in  pamphlets,  and  in  books.  Our  publica- 
tions have  been  placed  on  the  "Index."  Signor  Fogazzaro  has  been 
condemned.  Don  Murri  has  been  suspended  from  his  divine  offices 
(a  divinis).  There  is  no  annoyance  to  which  we  have  not  been 
exposed. 

But  the  Modernists,  so  far,  have  held  out  well. 

If  they  are  condemned,  they  submit  to  ecclesiastical  authority. 
They  reply:  Certainly,  we  admit  it.  From  your  point  of  view  we 
are  in  the  wrong.  It  is  clear  that  the  present  ecclesiastical  authority 
does  not  think  as  we  do,  and  we  recognize  this  since  you  wish  it. 

Having  said  this,  they  continue,  nevertheless,  to  think,  speak, 
and  even  write,  without  modifying  their  ideas. 

We  can  understand  that  there  should  be  among  the  Modernists 
such  an  employment  of  expediency  which  would  be  inexcusable 
in  men  who  are  masters  of  their  own  thoughts,  for  they  believe  they 
can  have  no  influence  over  their  contemporaries  except  by  remaining 
united  to  the  Church  in  which  they  were  born.  And  I  think  they 
are  right.  "So  long  as  we  are  in  the  Church,  we  are  listened  to," 
several  ecclesiastics  have  explained  to  me.  "If  we  separate  from 
the  Church,  it  will  be  all  over  with  our  influence.  All  those  who 
follow  us  to-day  would  then  become  suspicious  of  us." 


214 

Besides,  the  Modernists  do  not  purpose  doing  anything  abruptly. 
They  wish  to  sow  ideas  and  wait  patiently  until  they  germinate. 
They  wish  to  prepare  men's  minds,  to  accustom  them,  little  by  little, 
to  reflection  and  liberty,  to  create  an  opinion  that  shall  spread  and 
establish  itself  in  due  time.  And  in  thirty,  or  perhaps  fifty,  years 
they  believe  the  reforms  will  come  about  of  themselves,  seeing  that 
the  ecclesiastical  authority  will  then  no  longer  be  able  to  escape  from 
them. 

It  is  what  has  taken  place  in  the  case  of  "Americanism."  In  the 
United  States  of  America,  the  country  of  independence  and  free  indi- 
vidual action,  the  Roman  Catholics  enjoy  privileges  that  the  old 
continent  has  never  obtained.  The  general  opinion  demanded  them, 
and  the  Vatican,  which  knows  how  to  bow  to  imperious  circum- 
stances, acceded  to  the  demands.  Why  should  it  not  be  the  same  in 
Italy  ?  think  the  Modernists.  Why  should  not  the  reforms  in  Cathol- 
icism be  accepted  also  amongst  us?  And  why  should  not  a  first 
series  of  reforms  bring  about  others  in  their  train  until  the  complete 
programme  be  realized? 

Will  these  reforms  be  made  ? 

The  role  of  prophet  is  a  thankless  one,  and  it  is  not  for  me  to 
divine  what  the  future  holds  in  store  for  us.  However,  I  cannot 
help  expressing  my  fears.  The  Vatican  is  strong,  strong  indeed  by 
reason  of  its  inertia,  and  then  the  people  at  the  present  time,  especially 
in  the  south  of  Italy,  are  not  ripe  for  religious  spirituality,  and  will 
not  be  for  long  to  come.  And,  as  long  as  the  Vatican  is  able  to  rely 
upon  the  masses,  which  are  capable  of  sudden  revulsions  and  of 
jeering  at  their  former  object  of  superstitious  worship,  it  will  not 
disarm. 

Moreover,  is  an  internal  reform  of  official  Catholicism  possible? 
at  least,  reform  as  the  Modernists  understand  it  ?  The  papacy  has 
woven  such  a  close  web  about  itself  that,  supposing  it  should  one 
day  wish  to  reform,  it  would  find  it  impossible  to  set  about  the  task 
without  breaking  away  from  the  past,  and  in  a  way  putting  an  end 
to  its  own  existence.  To  touch  the  present  system  would  be  to 
shake  the  whole  edifice  built  up  by  the  authority  throughout  the 
centuries;  and  what  pope  will  resolve  upon  such  an  undertaking? 
Is  not  the  Catholic  Church  true  to  herself  in  spurning  the  claims  of 
the  Modernists?     To  satisfy  their  desires,  it  would  not  be  sufficient, 


215 

indeed,  to  revise  the  essential  dogmas,  common  to  all  confessional 
Christian  communities, — to  revise  them,  that  is,  by  modifying  their 
expression  and  their  theological  interpretation  while  still  preserving 
the  fundamental  terms;  but  it  would  be  necessary  to  transform  and 
often  suppress  many  articles  of  ecclesiastical  doctrine  that  in  the 
present  state  of  Catholicism  are  considered  necessary  to  the  unity 
and  for  the  safeguarding  of  the  system. 

And  will  not  the  Modernists,  despite  their  desire  of  remaining 
united  to  the  Church,  and  patiently  waiting  thirty  or  fifty  years, 
tired  at  last  of  obtaining  nothing,  be  compelled  one  day  to  form  a 
separate  party,  and  create  a  new  form  of  national  and  liberal  Cath- 
olicism ? 

In  the  sixteenth  century,  too,  the  reformers  wished  to  remain  united 
to  the  Church  of  their  fathers,  but  they  were  compelled  to  separate 
from  it. 

Now  the  Modernist  movement  of  to-day,  as  you  have  doubtless 
remarked,  presents  great  analogies  to  those  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and 
Zwingli  at  the  beginning  of  their  reforms. 

The  Modernists  have  already  been  accused  of  a  tendency  towards 
Protestantism.  They  have  vigorously  and  earnestly  protested. 
And,  indeed,  it  would  not  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  scientific  and 
critical  Modernists  to  unite  their  cause  with  that  of  the  Protestants 
in  Italy,  where  Italian  Protestantism  is  conservative  and  dogmatic. 
Besides,  they  wish  to  act,  I  repeat,  in  the  interest  of  their  own  Church, 
in  the  hope  of  securing  the  vitality  and  prosperity  of  Catholicism 
in  the  future.     But  will  they  succeed? 

These  are  some  of  the  questions  I  put  myself,  but  which  I  make 
no  pretension  to  answer.  But,  however  it  may  be,  from  this  move- 
ment that  I  have  endeavored  to  describe  to  you,  and  which  is  of 
thrilling  interest,  some  good  will  certainly  arise.  Even  should  it  be 
momentarily  arrested,  it  will  not  be  suppressed.  No  human  power, 
we  are  firmly  convinced,  can  arrest  the  march  of  truth.  And,  sup- 
posing the  Modernist  movement  should  remain  a  long  time  in  an 
unsettled  state,  individual  spiritual  life,  the  liberty  of  conscience, 
religious  criticism  and  science,  the  daily  practice  of  duty,  and  the 
triumph  of  social  justice  can  only  gain  thereby. 

As  for  us,  we  can  only  with  our  wishes  accompany  these  priests 
and  laymen  absorbed  in  the  search  of  truth  and  the  means  of  prog- 


2l6 

ress.  They  wish  to  act  alone.  They  are  men  of  independent  soul. 
Let  us  respect  their  desire.  Let  us  not  compromise  their  cause 
by  an  unseasonable  interference,  but  let  us  follow  them  in  thought 
with  all  the  interest  that  the  conquest  of  the  noblest  and  most  sacred 
liberties  arouses  in  our  minds, — the  liberty  to  open  our  hearts  spon- 
taneously to  every  manifestation  of  individual  Christian  activity, 
the  liberty  to  worship  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  in  perfect  accord 
with  our  conscience. 

MODERNIST   NEWSPAPERS   AND   REVIEWS. 

I. 

Politico-ecclesiastical  Questions. 

La  Rassegna  Nazionale  (fortnightly).  Florence,  46-48,  via  Gino  Capponi. 
Subscription  for  foreign  countries:  30  fr.  a  year;  16  fr.  six  months;  9  fr. 
three  months. 

It  is  not  devoted  to  exegetical  or  dogmatical  questions,  but  treats  occasionally  thoae 
concerning  politics  or  ecclesiastical  government.  It  is  inadequate  to  give  a  complete  idea 
of  the  Modernist  movement,  being  especially  a  literary  review. 

n. 

Social  Questions. 

Azione  democratica,  organo  della  Lega  Democratica  Nazionale  (fortnightly). 
Turin,  33,  via  Garibaldi.    Subscription,  1 .50  fr.  a  year,  not  including  postage. 
Organ  of  the  National-Democratic  League. 

Battaglie  cP  Oggi  (fortnightly).  Editor,  Gennaro  Avolio.  Neapel,  S.  Antonio 
a  Tarsia  (Ventaglieri),  No.  2.  Subscription  for  foreign  countries,  3  fr.  a 
year. 

La  Fiaccola  Democratica  Cristiana  (weekly).  Bologna,  18,  via  Zamboni.  Sub- 
scription, 3  fr.  a  year,  not  including  postage. 

Giovenlu  Nuova  (fortnightly).  Citta  di  Castello  (Perugia).  Subscription, 
2  fr.  a  year,  not  including  postage. 

La  Giustizia  Sociale  (weekly).  Florence,  10,  via  del  Corso.  Subscription, 
2.50  fr.  a  year,  not  including  postage. 

La  Liberia  (fortnightly).  Fermo  (Marche).  Subscription,  a  fr.  a  year,  not 
including  postage. 

La  Montagna  (fortnightly).  Editor,  G.  Traina.  Palermo,  8,  via  Giusino. 
Subscription,  1.50  fr.  a  year,  not  including  postage. 


217 

*  Rivista  di  Cuttura  (fortnightly).     Rome,  Societa  Nazionale  di  Cultura,  83 
piazza  S.  Eustachio.     Subscription  for  foreign  countries,  8  fr.  a  year. 

Not  all  those  newspapers  are  equal  in  importance,  nor  have  they  the  same  religious 
character.  Most  treat  only  questions  of  local  interest.  Especially  good  is  the  Rivisto  di 
Cultura. 


ILL 

Theology,   Dogma,   Biblical   Criticism,    Philosophy,   History  of   the 
Church,  Christian  Life,  etc. 

*  II  Rinnovamento,  rivista  critica  di  idee  e  di  fatti  (monthly).     Editors,  Aiace 

Antonio  Alfieri,  Alessandro  Casati,  F.  Tommaso  Gallarati-Scotti.  Milan, 
15,  via  Bigli.  Subscription  for  foreign  countries:  16  fr.  a  year;  8  fr.  six 
months. 

A  very  good  and  important  review,  giving  a  clear  knowledge  of  the  Modernist  movement. 

*  Rivista  Storico-critica  di  Scienze  Teologiche  (monthly).     Editor,  Rev.  Ernesto 

Bonaiuti.  Rome,  Libreria  editrice  Francesco  Ferrari,  102,  piazza  Ca- 
pranica.     Subscription  for  foreign  countries,  10  fr.  a  year. 

Rivista  delle  Riviste  per  il  Clero  (monthly).  Pubblicazione  mensile  dell'  Unione 
cattolica  tipogranca  di  Macerata.  Macerata,  5,  piazza  del  Duomo.  Sub- 
scription for  foreign  countries,  7.50  fr.  a  year. 

*  Stud*  Religiosi,  rivista   critica  e  storica   promotrice   della   cultura   religiosa 

in  Italia  (bi-monthly).  Editor,  Rev.  Salvatore  Minocchi,  D.  Theol.  Flor- 
ence, Bibliotheca  Scientifico-religiosa,  21,  via  Ricasoli.  Subscription  for 
foreign  countries,  12.50  fr.  a  year. 

IV. 

A  Woman's  Paper. 

Ptnsiero  e  Atione,  rivista  femminile  Italiana  (fortnightly).  Milan,  2,  via 
Dogana.     Subscription  for  foreign  countries,  5  fr.  a  year. 

V. 

A  Daily  Newspaper. 

Awenire  d'  Italia.  Bologna,  16,  viaAlbiroli.  Subscription:  16  fr.  a  year;  8.50 
six  months;  4.50  three  months,  not  including  postage. 

Political  daily  newspaper.    Contains  occasionally  religious  or  politico-ecclesiastical 
articles,  some  of  a  Modernist  character. 

Notk.— The  topic  of  Religion  in  Italy  has  been  treated  in  an  illuminating  manner  by  Dr. 
Andre'  at  previous  congresses.  See  "  The  Liberal  Movement  in  Italy,"  Proceedings  of  the 
Congress  at  London,  1001. 


2l8 


THE   FRENCH   HUGUENOTS:    THEIR    PAST   AND 
PRESENT   CONDITION. 

BY  PROF.  GASTON  BONET-MAURY,  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PARIS,  FRANCE. 

The  subject  of  my  address,  "The  Huguenots,"  brings  to  my 
memory  the  remarkable  words  of  President  Abraham  Lincoln  at 
Gettysburg:  "We  have  come  to  dedicate  a  portion  of  that  field 
as  a  resting-place  for  those  who  gave  their  lives,  that  the  nation 
might  live.  .  .  .  But  in  a  larger  sense  we  cannot  dedicate,  we  cannot 
hallow  this  ground.  It  is  for  us,  the  living,  rather  to  be  dedicated 
to  the  unfinished  work  they  have  so  nobly  advanced.  It  is  rather 
for  us  to  be  here  dedicated  to  the  great  task,  that  from  these  hon- 
ored dead  we  take  increased  devotion  to  that  cause,  for  which  they 
gave  the  last  full  measure  of  devotion." 

Our  forefathers,  like  yours,  the  heroes  of  the  Civil  War,  deserve 
our  admiration  and  gratitude,  since  we  owe  the  liberty  of  conscience, 
this  priceless  treasure,  to  their  sacrifice  of  property  and  life.  How- 
ever, they  were  men,  consequently  sinners.  We  shall  be  careful 
not  to  canonize  them,  as  Roman  Catholics  do  their  great  men. 
To  God  alone  be  given  the  glory!  Let  us,  first,  recall  shortly  what 
the  Huguenots  were  and  what  they  did. 

The  Past. 

Above  all,  they  were  genuine  Frenchmen.  It  is  simple  calumny, 
when  some  Roman  Catholic  writers  describe  them  as  foreigners, 
or  Frenchmen  who  had  adopted  German  or  English  doctrines. 
Faber  Stapulensis  (1512),  who  five  years  before  Luther  asserted 
the  principle  of  "justification  by  faith,"  was  a  Frenchman  from 
Picardy.  French,  too,  were  Guillaume  Farel  (of  Gap  in  Dauphine"), 
Gerard  Roussel  (of  Vacquerie  in  Picardie),  Robert  01ive"tan,  Jean 
Calvin  (of  Noyon,  Picardie),  Theodore  Beza  (of  Vezelay,  Burgundy), 
and  other  founders  of  the  Reformation  in   our  country.    Erasmus, 


219 

Luther,  and  Knox  had  only  a  stimulating  influence  on  the  evangelical 
movement  in  France.  By  others  it  has  been  asserted  that  the 
Huguenots  were  a  party  of  ambitious  noblemen,  that  the  cause 
of  the  religious  wars  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  the  enmity  of 
the  Chatillon,  the  Conde",  and  the  Rohan  against  the  Guise  and  the 
Montmorency.  These  assertions  are  all  untrue.  No  doubt  there 
were  among  the  Huguenots  a  number  of  illustrious  lords,  but  also 
many  working  people,  such  as  Jean  Leclerc  and  the  wool-carders 
of  Meaux,  Cavalier  and  the  farmers  of  the  Cevennes,  who  made 
the  Camisards'  War.  Among  them  were  not  only  lawyers,  like 
Anne  du  Bourg  and  Francois  Hotman,  but  also  many  priests, 
monks,  and  even  bishops  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  In  short, 
the  Huguenots  were  an  intellectual  and  moral  elite  of  Frenchmen, 
selected  from  the  various  social  conditions.  You  would  find,  too, 
among  them  women  as  conspicuous  by  their  character  as  by  their 
literary  ability.  In  the  first  rank,  three  princesses  of  royal  blood: 
Renata,  Louis  XII. 's  daughter,  Duchess  of  Ferrara;  Margaret  of 
Orleans,  the  "Maecenas"  of  the  scholars  and  poets,  and  who  was 
at  times  the  guardian  angel  of  the  persecuted  Calvinists;  Johanna 
of  Albret,  her  daughter,  the  incomparable  mother  of  Henry  IV. 
To  these  we  can  add  the  flower  of  the  nobility:  Louise  of  Mont- 
morency, mother  of  the  three  Chatillon  (Admiral  Coligny,  D'Andelot, 
and  Odet);  Charlotte  of  Laval,  wife,  and  Louise,  daughter  of  Co- 
ligny, who  married  Prince  William  I.  of  Orange;  Eleanor  of  Roye, 
Princess  of  Conde*,  etc. 

A  steadfast  trust  in  God  Almighty,  who  has  foreordained  the 
elect  and  leads  them  through  many  tribulations  to  heaven;  an 
entire  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  the  Redeemer,  an  invincible  hope  in  the 
final  victory  of  the  gospel;  an  acute  sense  and  strong  feeling  of 
responsibility, — all  these  virtues  formed  the  common  link  between 
these  Huguenots  of  all  conditions,  and  gave  them  great  likeness 
with  your  Pilgrim  Fathers. 

They  suffered  and  fought  heroically  during  two  generations  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  after  the  Revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
(1685)  during  another  century,  in  order  to  defend  religious  liberty 
and  to  vindicate  the  right  of  worshipping  according  to  the  true 
gospel  of  Christ,  purified  from  all  mediaeval  abuses  and  super- 
stitions. 


220 

During  the  first  period  of  that  very  long  struggle  the  kings  of 
France  condemned  to  the  stake  hundreds  of  Huguenots.  Then, 
backed  by  the  Guise,  the  Montmorency,  and  St.  Andre",  they  drew 
the  sword  and  tried  to  exterminate  them  by  the  sword  as  well  as  by 
the  stake.  But  in  vain.  After  all  these  wars,  Henry  IV.,  their 
former  defender,  granted  them  the  Edict  of  Nantes  (1598),  which 
gave  them  great  liberty  of  worship  and  many  financial  and  military 
privileges.  These  heroes  who  won  the  first  victory  were  Louis  de 
Berquin,  Anne  du  Bourg,  and  the  great  martyr,  Admiral  Coligny, 
the  Prince  of  Conde*,  La  Noue  Bras  de  Fer,  Duplessis  Mornay,  etc. 
This  edict  secured  them,  besides  religious  freedom,  sixty-seven 
years  of  peace,  during  which  they  became  prominent  through  agri- 
culture and  industry,  and  founded  a  remarkable  system  of  education. 

As  for  the  revocation  of  that  edict  by  Louis  XIV.  (1685)  and  the  new 
era  of  armed  persecution  which  it  opened  (the  dragonnades),  the  kings 
had  no  better  success  in  the  extermination  of  the  Protestant  faith. 
The  main  result  was  to  distribute  about  400,000  of  our  best  work- 
ingmen  and  tradesmen,  sailors  and  soldiers,  in  all  parts  of  Europe 
and  even  on  the  shores  of  America,  where  by  their  industry  they 
enriched  foreign  countries.*  As  for  the  500,000  to  600,000  men  who 
stayed  in  France, — deprived  of  their  ministers,  schools,  and  churches, 
— they  became  outwardly  "New  Catholics,"  but  compelled  by  force 
to  attend  mass,  which  in  their  eyes  was  a  kind  of  idolatry,  they 
remained  in  their  heart  faithful  to  the  Protestant  doctrine,  and 
prayed  and  chanted  Psalms  on  the  ruins  of  their  destroyed  churches. 

Responding  to  the  appeals  of  Claude  Brousson,  Jacques  Roger,  and 
Paul  Rabaut,  who  risked  their  lives  coming  back  to  France,  they  re- 
sumed their  worship  in  the  "  Desert."  Then,  in  the  year  of  the  death 
of  Louis  XIV.  (17 1 5)  Antoine  Court,  one  of  these  heroic  preachers, 
restored  discipline  and  Presbyterian  government  among  them  and 
preserved  them  from  anarchy  and  fanaticism.  At  last,  owing  to  the 
spirit  of  toleration  spread  by  the  philosophers  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  especially  to  the  energetic  attempts  of  La  Fayette 
(suggested  by  George  Washington),  they  got  from  King  Louis 
XVI.  the  Edict  of  1787,  which  granted  them  civil  rights  and  free- 
dom of  domestic  worship.  This  was  the  second  victory  won  by 
our  forefathers.    In  short,  it  is  through  this  struggle  of  the  Hugue- 

*  Samuel  Smiles,  "  The  French  Huguenots  and  their  Industries." 


221 

nots,  heroic  as  it  was  tenacious,  that  modern  France  conquered 
religious  liberty,  and  was  set  free  from  the  tyranny  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  clergy.  The  French  Revolution  and  Napoleon  I.,  by  the 
Concordat  (1801),  consecrated  this  double  victory  of  the  Huguenots, 
and  gave  them  back  complete  liberty  and  self-government.  Ever 
since,  Protestants,  whether  Lutherans  or  Calvinists,  have  enjoyed 
full  citizenship  in  France. 

The  Present. 

Let  us  now  glance  over  the  present  situation  of  French  Protestant- 
ism. Here  are  its  three  characteristic  features:  it  is  most  influential, 
energetic,  self-dependent,  and  abounding  in  works.  French  Prot- 
estantism exerts  in  public  affairs  an  influence  quite  disproportionate 
to  the  number  of  its  followers  (about  650,000).  Availing  itself  of 
the  liberties  granted  by  the  different  constitutions  of  France  since 
the  First  Republic  and  of  the  advantages  granted  to  it  by  Napoleon 
Bonaparte  (Law  of  18th  Germinal,  An  X,  1802),  it  has  organized 
itself,  built  scores  of  churches,  made  thousands  of  proselytes,  and 
acquired  a  great  social  and  political  influence.  But  for  the  loss  of 
Alsace  in  187 1  French  Protestantism  would  have  reached  again  the 
number  of  one  million  which  they  had  in  1685.  No  better  proof  of  this 
can  be  afforded  than  these  complaints  of  the  Roman  Catholic  ultramon- 
tanes,  Drumont,  the  author  of  "France  Juive,"  and  his  followers. 
"The  offspring  of  the  Huguenots,"  so  says  a  Roman  Catholic  clergy- 
man* "availed  themselves  of  the  neutrality  of  the  modern  State, 
and,  making  alliance  with  the  Jews  and  Free  Masons,  little  by  little, 
took  possession  of  all  the  avenues  leading  to  power,  helping  each  other 
and  excluding  the  Roman  Catholics.  A  great  many  conspicuous 
politicians,  who  most  contributed  to  bringing  about  the  present 
persecution  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  are  Protestant  or  have 
married  Protestant  women."  How  untrue  the  last  reproach  is, 
you  will  understand  when  I  tell  you  that  Waldeck  Rousseau  and 
FLmile  Combes,  the  leaders  of  the  last  anti-Catholic  movement,  were 
not  at  all  Protestant,  but  educated  as  Roman  Catholics  and  became 
later  infidels.  On  the  contrary,  many  Protestants — i.e.,  Georges 
Berger,  R.  Waddington,  members  of  Parliament,  Auguste  Sabatier, 

*  "  De  la  Tolerance  Protestante,"  by  E.  Camut,  cure"  de  St.  Jean  (Seine  et  Manic),  January,  igo6. 


222 

and  myself — have  come  to  the  defence  of  some  Roman  Catholic 
institutions,  when  unjustly  suppressed. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  true  that  Protestants  have  a  great  number  of 
eminent  representatives  in  the  various  government  offices;  i.e.,  the 
Department  of  Education.  But  there  are  for  this  fact  very  good 
reasons:  first,  because  they  gave  from  the  beginning  their  adhesion 
to  the  Republic;  secondly,  the  Protestants  displayed  remarkable 
self-dependence,  an  enterprising  and  organizing  power  in  critical 
circumstances,  whereas  Roman  Catholics  showed  themselves  help- 
less and  inoperative.  The  Lutherans  of  Paris  and  Montbe"liard 
after  the  annexation  of  Alsace,  which  deprived  them  of  two-thirds 
of  their  congregations,  reorganized  their  church  according  to  the 
episcopal  form  of  government,  and,  although  adhering  to  the  Con- 
fession of  Augsburg,  left  it  to  the  free  interpretation  of  every  member. 
In  their  turn  the  Calvinists,  conforming  to  the  Act  of  Separation 
(Dec.  9,  1905),  although  it  restricts  unjustly  the  rights  of  a  Chris- 
tian congregation,  formed  everywhere  the  so-called  associations 
cultudles  and  "societies  for  beneficence."  Through  these  means 
they  maintained  and  secured  for  the  future  their  divine  worship,  their 
Sunday  and  Thursday  schools,  and  provided  for  the  assistance  of 
the  poor;  while  the  Roman  Catholics,  having  refused  to  accept  the 
said  law,  are  still  in  the  most  precarious  and  ambiguous  situation. 
Let  us  now  return  to  Protestantism. 

Unfortunately,  owing  to  the  dogmatic  exclusiveness  and  fanatical 
egoism  of  the  orthodox  party,  we  have  not  been  able  to  maintain  one 
common  church.  The  orthodox  party  has  constituted  the  Evangelical 
Reformed  Church,  with  about  400  congregations,  and  compelled 
all  their  ministers  to  subscribe  to  the  unchanged  Confession  of 
Faith  of  1872.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Liberal  party,  having  made 
at  Montpellier  a  most  evangelic  declaration,  formed  the  United 
Reformed  Church  with  about  120  congregations.  Finally,  in 
October,  1906,  the  moderate  evangelicals  seceded  from  the  ultra- 
orthodox,  and  founded  at  Jarnac  a  larger  platform  in  order  to 
unite  all  Presbyterians,  under  the  name  of  "  Union  of  the  Reformed 
Churches."  The  Jarnac  movement  has  spread  widely  in  France, 
especially  in  large  cities,  like  Lyons,  Rouen,  Lille,  Nancy,  Bor- 
deaux, and  held  its  organizing  synod  at  Paris,  June,  1907.  It  num- 
bers 156  churches,  of  which  94  belong  to  the  liberal  party.     There 


223 

are,  besides,  the  Lutheran  Church  with  ioo  congregations,  the 
Free  Evangelical  Church  with  60,  the  Wesleyan  Church  with  28, 
the  Baptist  Church  with  26,  and,  last,  28  churches  independent 
of  any  denomination,  which  makes  a  total  of  824  churches. 

However,  even  more  than  by  its  social  influence  or  organizing 
power,  a  religious  body  shows  its  vitality  by  the  works  it  produces. 
Is  it  not  the  Lord  Jesus  who  said,  "The  tree  is  known  by  its  fruits"? 
Now  French  Protestantism  has  displayed  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury a  wonderful  richness  of  works.  The  institutions  founded  by  it 
may  be  divided  into  three  classes:  I.  Religious  works,  or  works  of 
propaganda;  II.  Works  of  education;  III.  Charities,  or  works  of 
social  assistance. 

I.    Works  of  Propaganda. 

The  Holy  Scripture  is  the  "Magna  Charta"  of  every  Protes- 
tant church.  The  Bible,  indeed,  by  showing  the  contradictions  of 
the  doctrines  and  practice  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  with  the 
Apostolic  Church,  was  instrumental  in  the  victory  of  Reformation, 
and  it  is  still  to-day  the  most  powerful  means  of  propaganda.  For 
that  capital  reason,  Protestants  began  their  social  work  in  France 
by  founding  the  Bible  Society  of  Paris,  1818.  Its  business  is  not 
only  to  distribute  scores  of  copies  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  it  cares, 
too,  for  the  quality.  It  constantly  improves  the  translations  of  the 
original  texts,  in  order  to  render  more  faithfully  the  thought  of  the 
sacred  writers.  Besides  the  canonical  books,  it  is  at  present  preparing 
a  translation  of  the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old  Testament,  unjustly  for  a 
long  time  excluded  from  the  Protestant  Bible.  We  have,  too,  in 
Paris,  working  for  the  same  purpose,  the  Bible  Society  of  France 
and  a  branch  of  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society.  * 

After  the  Bible  Society  was  born  the  Tract  Society  (1822).  Its 
object  is  to  publish  and  spread  small  booklets,  expressing  under 
various  forms  the  most  important  and  beautiful  lessons  of  Christian- 
ity, such  as  are  contained  in  the  Gospels.  Amongst  its  publications  we 
ought  to  mention  the  popular  "Almanach  des  Bons  Conseils"  and  the 
Ami  de  la  Jeunesse  et  des  Families,  illustrated  monthly.  The  emula- 
tion of  the  French  Protestants  was  early  stimulated  by  the  example 

*  Its  present  secretary  edits  a  most  interesting  monthly,  Le  Mtssager  de  Messagers. 


224 

of  the  British  and  German  Protestants,  and  they  founded  (1823) 
the  Society  of  Evangelical  Mission  to  convert  the  heathen.  After 
having  begun  with  the  Bassoutos,  a  branch  of  Betschouana,  South 
Africa,  little  by  little  it  extended  its  activity  to  all  parts  of  the  world 
where  France  has  colonies,  the  Tahiti  Islands,  New  Caledonia,  Sene- 
gal, Congo,  and  Madagascar.  In  the  latter  country  the  task  is 
colossal,  and  has  incurred  great  expense  of  men  and  money.  Two 
younger  sisters  of  the  Missionary  Society  have  been  born  since, — 
the  Society  for  the  Evangelization,  of  French  Colonies  (1869),  a 
branch  of  the  Socie'te'  Centrale,  and  the  Society  of  Coligny  (1888). 
The  latter,  founded  by  Dr.  Gustave  Monod  and  Rev.  Ch.  Fros- 
sard,  intends  to  help  the  Protestant  farmers  or  workingmen,  miserable 
in  their  native  country,  who  will  settle  in  the  colonies  in  Algeria. 
There  it  cares  for  their  religious  interests  in  gathering  them  around 
a  chapel  with  a  minister.  However,  our  Protestants  have  been  care- 
ful not  to  sacrifice  for  the  sake  of  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  the 
people  of  our  villages,  bound  by  the  chain  of  Roman  Catholic  super- 
stition or  fallen  into  infidelity.  From  this  need  have  issued  several 
societies,  vying  with  each  other  in  the  work  of  the  Domestic  Mission:  the 
Evangelical  Society  (1833),  formed  by  free  Presbyterians;  the  Central 
Society  for  Evangelization,  with  its  branches  at  Bordeaux  and 
Nlmes,  founded  by  Presbyterians  of  the  Established  Reformed 
Church;  and  the  Inner  Mission,  founded  by  the  Lutherans.  These 
three  associations,  having  the  same  purposes,  differ  only  in  the  kind 
of  people  they  approach.  The  first  one  appeals  especially  to  Roman 
Catholics  who  are  dissatisfied  with  their  priests  and  have  become 
indifferent  or  infidel.  The  second  and  third  give  help  to  the  Presby- 
terian and  Lutheran  Protestants  scattered  among  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic multitudes  and  running  the  danger  of  becoming  Roman  Catholic 
through  intermarriage  and  propaganda.  In  addition  to  these  so- 
cieties for  Inner  Mission  ought  to  be  mentioned  the  MacAll  Mission, 
because  of  its  peculiar  unsectarian  character.  It  has  its  name  from  a 
generous  Scotch  clergyman  who,  having  visited  Paris  after  the  Com- 
mune in  August,  187 1,  moved  by  pity  for  the  moral  abandonment  of 
our  workmen,  resolved  to  devote  his  whole  energy  to  their  moral  uplift- 
ing, through  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel.  Therefore,  he  opened 
some  lecture-rooms  in  the  poorest  districts  of  our  capital,  where  he 
taught  them  Christian  morals  and  the  life  of  Christ,  and  to  sing  hymns. 


225 

His  object  was  not  to  convert  them  to  Protestantism,  but  to  make 
them  true  Christians  and  honest  men.  Helped  by  his  admirable 
wife,  who  had  musical  gifts,  Rev.  MacAll  succeeded  very  well  and  did 
splendid  work.  After  thirty-five  years  of  uninterrupted  work  the 
MacAll  Mission  has  23  branches  in  the  different  cities  of  France  and 
10  stations  in  Paris,  where  its  agents,  partly  lay  men  and  women,  have 
to  deal  with  the  wildest  and  most  corrupt  elements  of  our  people, 
called  the  "Apaches" ;  that  is,  "ruffians."  Besides,  they  have  two 
missionary  boats,  named  "Bon  Messager"  and  "Bonne  Nouvelle," 
which,  sailing  on  the  rivers  and  channels,  penetrate  the  inland  of 
France.  The  expenses  in  the  year  1905-06  amounted  to  $57,210, 
for  which  they  had  received  only  $54,364,  leaving  a  deficit  of  $2,846. 
Through  these  four  or  five  societies  for  Home  Mission,  many 
thousands  of  souls  have  been  brought  from  darkness  to  light  or  pre- 
vented from  losing  all  belief.  The  Socie'te"  Centrale  d'Evangeliza- 
tion  at  the  end  of  1906  founded  and  made  self-dependent  89  congre- 
gations. From  1903  to  1907  it  built  27  churches.  Before  the  Law 
of  Disestablishment,  it  maintained  1,200  churches  or  temporary 
places  of  worship  in  summer  resorts.  Since  1906  it  supports  only 
184.  Its  expenses  during  these  fourteen  years  amounted  to  $1,116,- 
55o- 

II.  Works  of  Education. 

Protestants  have  always  been  friends  of  education:  remember  the 
motto  of  the  Genevese  Church, — Post  lenebras  lux.  The  French 
Presbyterians  understood  that  the  primary  want  of  their  Church  was 
to  have  clever  ministers  and  learned  laymen.  Therefore,  they 
founded  schools  and  academies;  the  latter,  above  all,  for  the  educa- 
tion of  Protestant  ministers.  The  Huguenots  had  in  the  seven- 
teenth century  seven  academies,  besides  the  Genevese  Academy 
founded  by  Calvin,  of  which  Theodore  de  Beze  was  the  first  presi- 
dent and  in  which  taught  so  many  eminent  professors.*  The  most 
flourishing  academies  were  at  Montauban,  Saumur,  and  Sedan. 
All  these  were  abolished  some  years  before  the  Revocation.  After 
the  restoration  of  public  worship  in  France  (1802),  the  French  govern- 
ment established  two  academies,  at  Montauban  (1808)  and  Stras- 
bourg (1818).     One  ought  to  add  the  National  School  of  Divinity  at 

*  Borgeaud,  "  L'Academie  de  Calvin,"  Geneve,  igoo. 


226 

Geneva;  for,  as  reward  for  the  services  rendered  during  two  and  a 
half  centuries  to  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  France,  the  French 
students  have  been  permitted  to  study  theology  there,  provided  they 
pass  their  examination  of  B.D.  in  a  Faculty  of  France.  After  the 
annexation  of  Alsace  to  Germany  (1871)  the  French  Faculty  of 
Strasbourg  was  transferred  to  Paris,  at  the  suggestion  of  W.  Wadding- 
ton  (1877),  minister  of  public  education,  and  annexed  to  the  uni- 
versity of  our  capital.  This  Protestant  School  of  Divinity  succeeded 
very  well,  and,  owing  to  the  able  exertions  of  Dean  Fr.  Lichtenberger 
and  of  Dean  Auguste  Sabatier,  soon  became  an  intense  centre  of  the 
scientific  study  of  religion.  According  to  the  Strasbourg  tradition  our 
Faculty,  in  spite  of  the  utmost  efforts  of  the  leaders  of  the  orthodox 
party  in  Paris,  never  would  subscribe  to  any  creed  nor  impose  it 
upon  our  students,  so  that  it  became  suspicious  to  the  Evangelical 
party.  The  School  of  Montauban,  on  the  contrary,  submitted  to 
the  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Synod  of  1872,  and,  as  a  reward,  has 
been  maintained  by  the  rich  Orthodox  of  Paris  and  Toulouse,  who 
make  exclusively  subsidies  to  it.  Both  Faculties,  whose  professors 
and  students,  nevertheless,  keep  mutually  in  friendly  intercourse, 
have  victoriously  overcome  the  crisis  of  the  Disestablishment,  owing 
to  the  liberality  of  their  friends,  and  because  they  took  advantage 
■of  the  law  of  the  9th  of  December,  1905. 

However,  the  dark  spot  on  the  horizon  is  that  the  precarious 
financial  condition  of  many  churches  in  remote  and  poor  districts 
may  discourage  the  candidates  for  the  ministry.  We  ought,  on  the 
one  hand,  to  secure  to  the  ministers  of  small  parishes  a  satisfactory 
salary,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  stimulate  the  inclination  for  the 
ministry  among  the  well-to-do  classes  of  the  nation.* 

Whereas  the  Schools  of  Divinity  assure  the  future  of  our  congre- 
gations, the  Society  of  Huguenot  History  is  a  representative  of  our 
glorious  past.  Founded  in  1853  by  a  committee  of  which  Charles 
Read,  Charles  Waddington,  Athanase  Coquerel  Jr.,  were  the  pro- 
moters, its  object  is  "to  search  for,  gather,  and  publish  all  manu- 
scripts or  printed  documents  of  interest  for  the  French  Protestant 
Church."    For  this  purpose  the  society  has  a  library,  the  building 

*  The  present  number  of  our  candidates  for  the  ministry  is  as  follows:  Geneva,  7;  Mon- 
tauban, 1  a ;  Paris,  11, —  some  30  in  all.  This  sum  corresponds  to  about  120  students  in  the 
ministry  in  the  three  Schools  of  Divinity. 


227 

of  which  is  a  gift  of  Baron  F.  de  Schickler,  with  50,000  volumes 
and  scores  of  precious  manuscripts  and  prints.  It  edits  an  illus- 
trated monthly  by  Rev.  N.  Weiss,  which  reproduces  rare  manu- 
scripts, thus  saving  them  from  oblivion  or  from  nearly  certain 
destruction. 

However,  it  was  necessary  to  make  our  working  people  and 
farmers  capable  of  reading  the  Bible  and  the  news  about  Missions, 
or  the  glorious  annals  of  the  Huguenots.  Therefore,  some  noble- 
men, as  Marquis  de  Jaucourt,  Count  Ver-Huel,  Baron  Delessert, 
etc.,  founded  in  1829  the  Society  for  Spreading  Primary  Education 
among  the  French  Protestants.  The  latter,  incorporated  by  ordi- 
nance of  Charles  X.,  a  king  who  was  not  at  all  favorable  to  Protestant- 
ism, was  the  prime  mover  of  popular  education  in  France.  In  1833 
a  member  of  the  committee,  Francois  Guizot,  became  prime  minister 
of  King  Louis  Philippe.  On  his  initiative  the  Parliament  passed  the 
first  bill  organizing  schools  for  boys  and  girls  in  our  country.  Since 
1835  tne  said  society,  according  to  Guizot's  plan,  tried  to  have  the 
schools  previously  opened  adopted  as  public  schools  by  the  town 
councils.  Thus  it  created,  in  the  midst  of  the  ignorant  and  supersti- 
tious countries,  centres  of  light  and  free  inquiry,  and,  after  having  in- 
trusted them  to  the  parish,  went  farther  to  establish  new  schools. 
The  advantages  gained  increased  the  financial  means,  so  that  it  could 
found  several  training  colleges,  at  Courbevoie  (1846),  Boissy  St. 
Le*ger  (1856),  and  gave  subsidies  to  the  standard  schools  at  Dieulefit 
(Drome),  Glay  (Doubs),  etc. 

During  the  78  years  of  its  existence  the  Society  for  Primary 
Education  has  paid  8,217,199  francs  ($1,643,439).  It  has  opened 
and  supported  1,300  primary  schools,  6  normal  and  standard  schools. 
Since  1883,  deprived  of  the  subsidies  and  scholarships  granted  by 
the  State  in  consequence  of  the  secularization  of  all  schools,  the 
society  was  obliged  to  limit  the  number  of  new  schools.  But,  re- 
ligious teaching  having  been  excluded  from  the  public  schools, 
they  considered  as  an  urgent  duty  the  task  of  providing  it  on 
Thursday,  which  is  a  school  holiday  in  France.  From  1893  to 
1907  it  gave  grants  to  3,000  existing  Thursday  Schools  and  helped 
to  create  500  new  ones. 

Thirty  years  afterwards  the  Sunday  School  Society,  formed  by  the 
Rev.  Paul  Cook  and  Montandon  (1852),  completed  the  work  of  the 


228 

latter  society  by  providing  for  the  Biblical  education  of  children. 
However,  the  Sunday-school  work  of  France  had  begun  much 
earlier.  The  first  Sunday-schools  were  established  by  Rev.  Cadoret 
at  Luneray  (1814)  and  by  Rev.  Martin  at  Bordeaux  (1815).  Paris 
owed  its  Sunday-school  to  Rev.  Frederick  Monod  at  the  Oratoire 
Church  (1822).  Now  we  have  1,200  Sunday-schools,  of  which 
800  are  in  connection  with  the  Sunday  School  Society,  teaching 
about  70,000  children  by  means  of  6,oco  teachers.  Besides,  since 
our  primary  schools  have  become  secularized,  it  has  been  necessary 
to  provide  our  school  boys  and  girls  with  religious  instruction.  For 
that  purpose  we  established  Thursday  Schools.  There  are  now  a 
thousand  such  schools,  attended  by  about  50,000  children.  The 
Sunday  School  Society  publishes  a  Book  of  Hymns,  a  Handbook  of 
Sacred  History,  and  illustrated  leaves.  Its  general  agent,  Rev. 
Charles  Bie'ler,  is  the  author  of  a  "History  of  the  People  of  God." 
From  1884  to  1886,  when  the  Parliament  of  the  Third  Republic, 
under  Jules  Ferry's  energetic  impulse,  voted  the  bills  on  secular, 
free,  and  compulsory  education  of  the  people,  it  was  only  among 
Protestants  that  our  great  minister  could  find  co-operation,  because 
this  need  of  primary  education  was  in  our  tradition.  Let  us 
pay  our  tribute  of  gratitude  to  Ferry's  eminent  coworkers,  Fer- 
dinand and  Benjamin  Buisson,  Felix  Pdcaut,  Jules  Steeg.  The 
two  last,  who  had  been  Protestant  ministers,  were  directors  of  the 
School  for  Head-mistresses  at  Fontenay-aux-Roses,  and  stamped  it 
with  the  Protestant  mark. 

III.    Charities  and  Social  Work. 

Although  devoting  much  of  their  efforts  and  their  money  to  the 
expansion  of  the  gospel,  of  Christian  schools,  and  to  the  theological 
training  of  their  ministers,  French  Protestants  did  not  neglect  the 
works  of  brotherhood  and  mutual  help,  remembering  Saint  Paul's 
saying,  that  "love  is  the  most  excellent  of  virtues."  The  following 
are  the  foremost  of  these  institutions,  in  the  order  of  time.  (1828) 
A  Swiss  watch-maker,  M.  Vauchez,  seconded  by  Marquis  de  Se"gur 
and  M.  Laffon  de  La-de"bat,  founded  in  Paris  the  Soctete'  de  Prevoy- 
ance  de  Secours  Mutuel,  which  was  incorporated  (182Q)  and  ap- 
proved by  an  imperial  decree  (1857).     Its  by-laws  were  taken  by 


229 

Emperor  Napoleon  III.'s  ministers  as  the  standard  in  forming 
the  Societies  of  Mutual  Help.  Our  Protestant  society  was  the 
prime  mover  in  the  Mutualist  movement  in  France,  which  counts 
now  26,000  societies.  It  has  a  branch  in  every  one  of  the  twenty 
wards  of  our  capital,  besides  six  branches  in  the  suburbs,  each  with 
its  physician,  chemist,  and  clergyman.  They  meet  each  year  at 
a  familiar  dinner.  (1841)  Rev.  Frank  Vermeil,  aided  by  Mile. 
Malvesin  (of  Bordeaux),  established  at  Paris  the  first  House  of 
Deaconnesses,  the  main  object  of  which  was  to  give  a  shelter  to  re- 
pentant women.  It  was  also  to  serve  as  an  institution  for  nurses, 
with  an  infirmary  annexed.  During  sixty-six  years  it  has  made  great 
extension  in  the  Departments:  it  created  branches  at  Strasbourg  and 
Montbdliard.  There  are,  besides,  in  the  Lutheran  Church  so 
called  "parish  deaconesses."  (1841)  In  the  same  year  Count 
Agenor  de  Gasparin  founded  at  Ste.  Foy  a  reformatory  school  for 
vicious  boys,  on  the  model  of  Wichern's  Rauhe  Haus  (Hamburg), 
and  of  the  Mettray  Colony  established  by  Judge  Demetz.  (1848) 
Rev.  John  Bost,  a  philanthropist  of  the  same  stock  as  Saint  Vincent 
de  Paul  and  Tuckermann,  established  at  La  Force  (Dordogne) 
an  asylum  for  epileptic,  blind,  and  crippled  children  generally  con- 
sidered as  incurables.  There  he  renewed  the  miracles  of  apostolic 
love  and  generosity.  In  the  following  year,  the  Lutherans  founded 
at  Montbeliard  a  Society  for  the  Protection  of  Apprentices  (1849) 
that  served  as  standard  for  the  manifold  Protestant  Patronages  d'Ap- 
prentis  at  Paris,  Lyons,  Nlmes,  etc. 

In  connection  with  these,  ought  to  be  mentioned  with  encomium  the 
Young  Men's  Christian  Association,  which,  owing  to  the  liberality  of 
Mr.  Stokes  (a  New  York  man),  was  able  to  build  a  splendid  home  at 
Paris,  14  rue  de  Trevise,  and  has  now  branches  in  nearly  all  churches 
of  France.  It  is  open  also  to  non-Protestant  youth,  so  that  their 
moral  influence  spreads  in  much  wider  circles. 

(1868)  MM.  Rossignol  and  Jacques  Dubochet  founded  a  so- 
ciety to  find,  gratuitously,  employment  for  working  men  and  clerks, 
under  the  name  "Socie'te'  du  Travail,"  without  consideration  of 
nationality  or  worship.  It  has  brought  forth  many  other  societies 
for  help  by  means  of  work,  such  as  the  "Work  of  rue  de  Berlin" 
(for  women)  and  the  "Hospitable  Houses"  at  Belleville  (for  men), 
and  others  at  Paris,  at  Marseilles,  Nlmes.    To-day,  indeed,  the  en- 


230 

lightened  philanthropists,  instead  of  giving  alms,  which  often  morti- 
fies and  enervates,  prefer  to  help  poor  people  by  procuring  them  work, 
which  stimulates  energy  and  develops  self-dependence. 

Finally,  Protestant  charity  has  gone  a  step  further.  It  has  under- 
stood that  the  question  of  helping  the  poor  is  inseparable  from  eco- 
nomical conditions.  Therefore,  it  has  suggested  other  remedies  fcr 
pauperism,  such  as  a  more  equitable  distribution  of  the  products 
of  work  between  the  employer  and  the  employees,  the  smoothing  of 
intercourse  between  them,  and  the  improving  of  the  abodes  of  work- 
ingmen.  Hence  the  establishment  of  Cercles  d'Ouvriers,  the  society 
for  workingmen's  houses,  to  which  M.  Jules  Siegfried,  Cheysson, 
have  contributed  largely.  The  principle  of  profit  sharing  among 
employees  has  been  adopted  by  several  of  our  manufacturers, 
and  the  Co-operative  Societies  and  Brotherhoods.  In  all  these  social 
reforms  our  laymen,  Charles  Robert,  Sautter,  J.  Siegfried,  and,  also, 
our  clergymen,  Tony  Fallot,  Charles  Wagner,  Louis  Comte,  Wil- 
fred Monod,  bore  the  greatest  part. 

The  Revue  du  Christianisme  Social,  edited  by  Rev.  Chastand, 
who  is  also  editor  of  the  Signal,  a  daily  paper,  gathers  all  informa- 
tion about  this  subject,  and  either  through  articles  or  through  con- 
gresses, which  met  at  Nimes,  Rouen,  and  Geneva,  has  given  strong 
impulse  to  the  study  of  social  reform. 

In  addition,  French  Protestantism  has  held  first  rank  in  art,  in 
literature,  and  in  the  political  press.  I  may  quote  only  the  most 
celebrated  names.  In  art  we  are  proud  to  mention  Baron  de 
Triquety  and  Bartholdi,  the  sculptor,  well  known  in  your  country; 
the  painters  Leopold  Robert,  Ary  Scheffer,  the  Girardets;  in  litera- 
ture, J.  J.  Rousseau,  Mme.  de  Stael,  B.  Constant,  F.  Guizot,  Eng. 
Pelletan,  fidmond  de  Pressense",  etc.;  in  the  press,  Ad.  Michel, 
N.  Peyrat,  Albert  Reville,  and  other  contributors  to  the  Siecle, 
Nefftzer,  Scherer,  and  Auguste  Sabatier,  who  started  the  Temps. 

After  having  reviewed  the  work  of  French  Protestantism  in  these 
different  fields,  you  will,  no  doubt,  be  persuaded  of  its  undiminished 
vitality.  Protestantism  shows  in  France,  as  in  other  countries,  its 
peculiar  virtues  of  probity,  self-dependence,  and  initiative.  It  is 
owing  to  their  public  spirit  and  disinterestedness  that  they  exert  so 
powerful  an  influence  in  all  branches  of  activity.  The  end  of  their 
ambition  is  less  to  win  numerous  proselytes  for  their  Church,  than  to 


231 

propagate  in  the  soul  of  our  countrymen  the  Christian  principles  of 
instruction  and  free  inquiry,  mutual  help  and  self-sacrifice. 

In  spite  of  their  small  number,  surrounded  by  a  mass  of  Roman 
Catholics,  and  of  ecclesiastical  divisions,  French  Protestantism 
is  still  increasing,  marching  towards  spiritual  union.  This  unity  is 
aimed  at  not  by  means  of  a  dogmatic  formula,  but  by  means  of  a 
deeper  and  more  intense  Christian  life. 

There  are  two  signs  of  this  better  future:  (i)  The  alliance  made 
between  Rev.  Edouard  Soulier,  general  agent  of  our  Young  Men's 
Christian  Association,  and  Marc  Sanguier,  the  founder  and  head  of  the 
Catholic -democratic  society  named  Le  Sillon,  to  maintain  Christian 
belief  and  morals  against  the  dissolving  influence  of  militant  atheists; 
(2)  The  Union  of  Free  Thinkers,  Free  Believers,  for  Ethical  Culture, 
founded  at  Paris  recently  by  Rev.  I.  H.  Kaspar,  a  former  missionary, 
Admiral  Reveilere,  Professor  G.  Seaillez,  F.  Buisson,  Pierre  Pe"caut, 
and  myself.  The  object  is  to  preserve  from  gross  materialism 
an  important  body  of  free-thinking  Republicans.  "The  latter,  so 
they  said  in  their  Declaration,  admit  that  religious  feeling  is  a 
powerful  motive  of  action,  acknowledge  that  ethical  culture  ought 
to  give  to  it  a  place,  and  are  ready  to  inquire  about  the  religious 
forms  of  culture  in  order  to  see  what  of  the  principles  or  methods 
or  ideals  of  Religion  may  be  used  to  build  up  the  conscience, 
without  requiring  any  sacrifice  either  to  Science  or  to  Reason." 
(June,  1907.) 

More  and  more  people  are  judged  from  their  work,  rather  than 
from  their  creed.  Our  men  lay  more  stress  on  what  unites  than  on 
what  divides,  and  begin  to  understand  their  responsibility  towards 
the  multitude  of  indifferent  or  infidels,  wandering  astray,  sheep  with- 
out a  shepherd. 

A  glorious  prospect  lies  before  us.  If  we  acquire  full  conscious- 
ness of  our  duty,  we  can  help  to  raise  up  our  countrymen  from  their 
moral  and  religious  depression,  and  lead  them  to  the  overflowing 
source  of  moral  force  and  grandeur,  which  is  in  the  freely  interpreted 
gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.     We  are,  indeed,  sowers  of  a  divine  seed. 

Note. — See  also  articles  on  Protestant  and  Liberal  Christianity  in  France,  by  Profs.  Bonet- 
Maury,  Jean  Reville,  E.  Fontanes,  and  others,  printed  in  the  Proceedings  of  previous  Con- 
gresses in  London,  Amsterdam,  and  Geneva. 


232 


THE   CRISIS   IN   THE   CATHOLIC   CHURCH. 

BY  ABB&  A.   HOUTIN,  OF  PARIS. 

When  one  reads  a  manual  of  history,  one  sees  that  anxieties  of 
conscience,  theological  discussions,  politico-theological  rivalries, 
have  always  disturbed  the  heart  of  man.  At  times  the  struggle  is 
particularly  poignant  and  radical:  then  an  ancient  form  of  religion 
disappears  before  a  new  faith,  destined  to  supplant  it  perhaps  com- 
pletely. The  Christian  world  is  at  present,  in  my  opinion,  in  one 
of  these  particularly  critical  periods.  Among  individuals  the  best 
informed,  among  the  peoples  the  most  civilized,  who  by  their  birth 
or  history  are  those  adhering  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  the  religious 
idea,  the  religious  sentiment,  have  entered  into  a  crisis  extremely 
grave.  The  Church  of  Rome,  despite  its  strictly  authoritative 
constitution,  has  not  escaped  any  more  than  the  other  churches, 
wherever  the  theories  of  a  free  examination  have  been  vigorously 
applied. 

A  priest  of  this  Church,  I  desire  to  picture  to  you  the  particular 
manner  in  which  she  experiences  this  crisis.  You  are  already 
well  informed,  no  doubt,  on  this  matter;  but,  exact  as  your  informa- 
tion may  be,  I  hope  to  make  it  more  precise  and  complete  on  some 
points,  as  one  on  the  inside  should  be  able  to  do  for  those  outside 
the  Church.  Need  I  add  that  no  one  loved  his  Church  more  than 
I;  that  no  one  experienced  more  sorrowfully  than  I  its  afflictions, 
or  sought  to  acquaint  himself  more  exactly  with  them,  in  order  to  aid 
in  remedying  them  according  to  his  ability,  to  the  fullest  degree 
possible  ? 

The  Catholics  for  whom  the  traditional  orthodox  teaching  no 
longer  suffices,  those  who,  as  a  consequence  of  their  historic  and 
philosophical  studies,  desire  that  the  ecclesiastical  authority  accord 
them  more  liberty  of  thought  and  religious  conduct,  may  be  separated 
into  three  classes. 


233 

The  first  comprises  those  Catholics,  comparatively  orthodox,  who 
believe  in  the  foundation  of  the  Church  by  Christ,  the  second  person 
in  the  Trinity,  incarnated  in  a  man.  They  agree  that  the  pope 
is  the  head  of  the  Church,  as  the  successor  of  Peter,  to  whom  Jesus 
is  reported  to  have  said  (to  him,  and,  in  his  person,  to  his  successors), 
Thou  art  Peter  (Petros),  and  on  this  rock  (Petra)  will  I  build  my 
church.  But,  though  they  are  convinced  that  the  authority  of 
the  Roman  Church  is  legitimate,  they  allow  that  this  authority 
has  been  sometimes  exercised  by  ignorant,  incapable,  and  vicious 
men.  They  hold  that  there  exist  in  the  Church  grievous  and  super- 
annuated customs,  which  it  is  necessary  to  reform,  and  opinions 
wrongly  founded  or  erroneous,  which  need  to  be  modified.  One 
point  they  have  especially  at  heart.  They  do  not  like  the  inter- 
ference of  the  spiritual  power  in  temporal  questions.  They  dis- 
avow the  Inquisition.  The  Syllabus  of  Pius  IX.  appears  to  them 
a  manifestation  badly  made  and  inopportune.  If  the  adaptation 
of  the  old  Church  to  the  new  social  and  political  order  particularly 
occupies  them,  in  the  domain  of  science  they  show  themselves 
imbued  with  the  same  liberal  principles.  They  demand  more 
latitude  for  scholars  and  savants.  They  willingly  recall  the  story 
of  Galileo  in  order  to  impart  to  theologians  a  wise  discretion.  They 
admit  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  but  would  confine  it  to  questions 
of  faith  and  morals.  Despite  the  prohibitions  of  the  pope,  they  do 
not  hesitate  to  declare  that,  as  concerns  other  matters,  the  Holy 
Scriptures  may  contain  errors.  Finally,  just  as  they  hold  that  in 
political  affairs  the  time  for  absolutism  and  the  coup  d'itat  is  passed, 
so  they  desire  that  questions  of  conscience  be  solved  by  reason,  by 
persuasion,  and  not  by  the  hurling  of  anathemas  and  by  excommuni- 
cation. 

The  second  group  is  better  informed  concerning  the  conclusions 
of  historical  science.  It  knows  more  exactly  what  was  the  teaching 
of  Christ.  Jesus  believed  that  the  coming  of  the  Messianic  Kingdom 
was  close  at  hand,  and  consequently  he  did  not  found  any  church. 
Neither  did  he  dream  of  identifying  himself  with  the  eternal  God. 
He  believed  himself  to  be  man,  and  it  was  only  as  the  consequence 
of  equivocations  and  misunderstandings  that  the  disciples  of  his 
disciples  adored  him  as  God. 

Many  Catholics  admit  these  conclusions.     They  have  solved  the 


234 

fundamental  problem  of  the  personality  of  Jesus  and  reject  the 
mythology  of  Christianity.  At  the  bottom  they  are  Deists,  whom 
one  may  call,  because  of  their  attachment  for  certain  traditions, 
Christian  Deists. 

With  other  Catholics,  finally, — this  is  our  third  group, — the  sur- 
render of  ancient  beliefs  is  still  more  extreme. 

Many  among  the  members  of  this  Congress  may  not  understand 
very  well  the  Catholic  mind,  not  knowing,  perhaps,  that  one  of  the 
greatest  and  most  frequent  temptations  which  assail  the  faithful 
of  the  Roman  Church  is  that  of  all  or  nothing.  A  God  has  estab- 
lished upon  the  earth  an  infallible  Vicar  and  founded  a  visible  Church, 
outside  of  which  there  is  no  salvation,  or  else  the  anguish  and  suffer- 
ings to  which  man  is  abandoned  prove  that  no  superior  being  exists, 
for  a  superior  being  would  have  pity  on  him.  As  God  has  not 
founded  the  Church,  neither  instituted  the  papacy,  he  does  not 
exist.  Deism  is  a  mythological  residuum.  With  the  personality 
of  God  there  disappears  also  the  thesis  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul — a  myth  and  an  impossibility — and  of  free  will — an  illusion. 
To  these  ancient  terms  there  is  no  corresponding  ontological  reality. 
But  our  fathers  believed  all  that.  Our  civilization  has  been  founded 
on  these  beliefs.  We  have  in  our  blood  ineffaceable  traces  of  them, 
which  will  still,  although  in  a  less  degree,  affect  our  remote  descend- 
ants. We  ought  not,  therefore,  we  cannot  break  with  this  past. 
It  is  necessary  for  us  to  let  fall  very  softly  these  dead  ideas  or  to 
transport  them  with  precaution  into  that  convenient  repository, 
the  history  of  religions.  Looking  forward  to  a  scientific  era,  those 
who  form  this  third  class  call  themselves  Catholics, — positivist 
Catholics,  atheistic  Catholics,  if  you  will. 

These,  then,  are  the  three  principal  categories  of  those  who 
call  themselves  at  present  indiscriminately  "liberal  Catholics," 
"modern  Catholics,"  and  "progressive  Catholics"  (les  Catholiques 
libSraux,  les  Catholiques  modernistes,  les  Catholiques  progressistes) . 
In  reality,  it  is  only  the  first  group  which  truly  merits  this  name. 
Logically  and  according  to  the  historical  sense  of  words,  the  two 
other  groups  are  not  Catholic,  are  not  even  Christian.  They  are 
such  only  through  policy,  and  attach  themselves  to  Catholicism 
by  means  of  a  symbolical  interpretation  more  ingenious  than  well 
founded. 


235 

That  the  true  liberal  Catholics  are  consistent  in  remaining  in  the 
Church  ought,  it  seems  to  me,  to  be  accorded.  Since  they  believe 
in  the  divine  institution  of  the  papacy,  they  ought  not  to  separate 
themselves  from  either.  According  to  their  own  theories,  all  reform, 
in  order  to  be  legitimate  and  efficacious,  can  only  take  place  by 
authority  and  with  its  consent.  They  therefore  beseech  the  papacy 
to  be  willing  to  modernize  itself,  and  they  await  the  issue. 

It  is  more  difficult  to  understand  why  the  Deists  or  the  atheists 
should  desire  to  continue  to  make  an  external  profession  of  Catholi- 
cism. But  it  is  a  fact.  There  are  many  among  them  doubtlessly 
partisans  of  the  axiom,  "A  man  of  probity  does  not  change  his 
religion."  Others  may  equally  think  that  the  form  of  religion 
which  no  longer  inspires  them  is  still  excellent  for  the  masses  of  the 
people,  and  that  it  is  not  advisable  to  destroy  it.  It  may  also  be 
that  ecclesiastics  who  have  lost  their  faith  retain  their  livings.  Others 
remain  in  order  to  proselyte,  in  order  to  work  more  conveniently 
in  liberalizing  their  co-religionists.  Others,  finally,  go  so  far  as  to 
cherish  the  idea  of  alienating  the  Church  itself,  of  secularizing  it. 
The  Deists  wish  to  make  it  a  deistic  church.  The  atheists  would 
transform  it  into  a  society  for  moral  culture,  the  guardian  of  duty, 
of  the  moral  ideal  which  humanity  pursues  in  its  endeavors  for  what 
is  good,  and  which  it  expresses,  they  tell  us,  under  the  symbols  of 
God  and  Immortality. 

All  these  Catholics  work,  speak,  and  write  in  order  to  assure  the 
triumph  of  their  ideas.  But  the  one  and  the  other,  even  the  more 
moderate,  are  compelled  to  use  great  precautions  in  order  not  to 
offend  the  religious  conservative  authorities,  and  in  order  not  to  repel 
their  timid  coreligionists,  whom  they  wish  to  gain  to  their  cause.  Such 
is  the  extraordinary  variety  of  subtleties  which  characterize  modern 
or  progressive  Catholicism.  The  unsophisticated  reader  is  lost 
in  it.  He  cannot  understand  these  writings  of  which  the  one  appears 
Catholic  without  being  Christian,  while  the  others  are  Christian 
without  being  Catholic:  some  again  express  pantheistic,  monistic, 
agnostic  ideas  in  an  orthodox  form  of  words,  according  to  the  pro- 
cedure called  by  these  innovators  "the  reinterpretation  of  formu- 
laries." 

Thanks  to  their  prudence,  these  tactics  have  much  success.  The 
spread  of  the  conclusions  of  history,  and  the  impossibility  of  to-day 


236 

grasping  dogmas  framed  under  the  philosophical  system  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  have  given  rise  to  a  great  crisis  of  faith  in  the  Catholic 
world.  Those  who  undergo  this  crisis  are  led  into  this  progressist 
literature,  which  has  now  followers  in  all  countries.  Their  most 
moderate  prototype  has  for  his  pseudonym  "Giovanni  Selva,"  and 
his  sponsor,  the  Italian  Senator  Fogazzaro,  says  that  his  true  name 
is  Legion.  "He  lives,  thinks,  and  works  in  France,  in  England,  in 
Germany,  in  America,  as  well  as  in  Italy.  He  wears  the  priestly 
garb  and  the  uniform  of  the  soldier,  as  well  as  the  coat  of  the  civilian. 
He  shows  himself  at  the  universities,  he  hides  himself  in  the  sem- 
inaries. He  fights  in  the  press,  he  prays  in  the  inmost  recesses  of 
the  monastery.  He  almost  no  more  preaches  sermons,  but  he  holds 
conferences.  He  is  exegete  and  historian,  theologian  and  scholar, 
journalist  and  poet.  He  does  not  always  write.  He  is  at  times 
only  an  impassioned  reader,  only  a  believer  as  also  a  thinker.  He 
is  a  republican,  he  is  a  royalist,  he  is  a  Christian  democrat,  he  is 
simply  a  liberal"  ("Les  Idees  Religieuses  de  Giovanni  Selva,"  dans 
Demain,  no.  du  8  fevrier,  1907). 

As  you  know,  the  ecclesiastic  authority  is  vividly  alarmed  at  the 
extent  and  depth  of  this  crisis. 

One  can  divide  the  existing  hierarchy  of  the  Church  into  two 
sorts  of  prelates,  the  sincere  and  the  politic. 

The  sincere  take  no  account  of  the  mortal  wounds  which  history 
has  inflicted  on  their  theology.  They  believe  that  an  orthodox 
faith  has  been  committed  to  them  as  a  sacred  deposit,  and  that 
the  gates  of  hell  will  never  prevail  against  them.  They  also  refuse 
consent  to  any  doctrinal  change. 

The  politicians  in  the  Church  know  how  criticism  has  under- 
mined the  ancient  beliefs  and  what  danger  confronts  the  Church. 
Certain  among  them — these  are  the  minority — say:  "The  Church 
is  wrong:  she  is  dying.  Let  us  end  her  with  honor.  Let  us  give 
our  mother  a  becoming  funeral.  Let  her  dogmas  pass  away;  let 
us  keep  her  spirit  of  charity,  of  devotion,  of  sacrifice."  The  others 
say:  "It  must  be  that  criticism  is  the  truth,  and  that  truth  is  assured 
the  final  victory.  But  to  confess  the  truth  would  be  our  immediate 
death.  To  a  suicide  we  prefer  a  slow  natural  death.  We  will 
close  our  eyes  and  ears  to  the  truth." 

The  present  pope  is  not  only  a  sincere  man,  but  also  a  simple- 


237 

minded  one.  He  accepts  the  traditions  of  the  Church  much  more 
than  do  the  ordinary  orthodox  theologians.  In  order  to  give  an  idea 
of  his  mentality,  it  is  without  doubt  sufficient  for  me  to  tell  you  that 
he  has  defended  the  legend  of  the  Santa  Casa;  i.e.,  he  believes  that 
the  house  in  which  took  place  the  conception  of  Jesus  was  trans- 
ported by  angels  to  Italy.  Also  Pius  X.  does  not  comprehend  why 
and  how  the  Catholic  faith  of  the  Middle  Ages  could  be  changed. 

After  having  multiplied  his  warnings,  complaints,  and  threats,  he 
has  declared,  in  his  allocution  of  the  17  th  of  April,  1907,  the  innova- 
tors to  be  rebels.  "Rebels  are  such  as  profess,  and  repeat  under  subtle 
forms,  monstrous  errors  concerning  evolution,  concerning  dogma, 
concerning  a  return  to  the  pure  gospel, — that  is  to  say,  to  the  Gospels 
purified,  as  they  tell  us,  of  the  explications  of  theology,  of  the  defini- 
tions of  Councils,  of  the  maxims  of  asceticism, — concerning  the 
emancipation  of  the  Church  according  to  their  new  manner,  without 
being  in  revolt,  to  end  that  they  be  not  expelled;  .  .  .  finally,  concern- 
ing the  adaptation  to  the  present  time  in  all,  in  the  manner  of  speak- 
ing, writing,  and  preaching,  of  a  charity  without  faith;  very  indulgent 
toward  unbelievers,  but  which  opens  to  all  the  way  of  eternal  destruc- 
tion." 

"All  these  errors,  and  a  thousand  similar  ones,  they  make  popular 
in  treatises,  in  reviews,  in  books  of  devotion,  and  even  in  romances; 
they  envelop  them  with  certain  equivocal  terms,  with  certain  nebulous 
formulas,  in  order  to  contrive  a  pretext,  always  on  the  defensive, 
of  such  a  kind  as  not  to  incur  open  condemnation,  and  meanwhile 
to  catch  the  unwary  in  their  web." 

The  pope  has  also  taken  energetic  action.  By  virtue  of  measures 
which  he  has  secretly  or  publicly  taken,  Father  Tyrrell,  the  ex- Jesuit, 
has  not  said  mass  for  nineteen  months  past,  Abbe"  Loisy  for  eleven 
months,  Abbe*  Murri  for  six  months.  Thus  have  been  deprived 
of  their  priestly  functions  in  England  the  greatest  philosophical 
apologist  of  the  Church,  in  France  its  greatest  historical  apologist, 
in  Italy  the  apostle  who  aims  to  reconcile  the  Church  and  democracy. 
Later,  on  the  4th  of  July  last,  Pius  X.  has  hurled  through  the  me- 
dium of  the  Inquisition  a  new  Syllabus  condemning  nearly  all  the 
conclusions  of  the  religious  sciences. 

Finally,  in  an  encyclical  issued  in  the  present  month,  he  has 
repeated  the  same  condemnations.     The  outcome  will  be  either  to> 


238 

excommunicate  at  once  a  great  number  of  heretics,  and  thereby 
provoke  much  trouble  in  the  Church,  or  to  tolerate  the  innovators 
who  will  quietly  continue  their  formidable  propaganda. 

In  any  case,  however  the  pope  may  decide,  he  has  before  him 
something  which  he  will  not  be  able  to  arrest.  This  is  the  populariza- 
tion of  history.  With  this  penetration  of  historic  knowledge  among 
the  people  the  present  crisis  will  become  unceasingly  more  radical 
and  more  terrible. 

The  Church  of  Rome  has  surmounted  great  crises:  that  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  when,  as  a  result  of  the  Renaissance,  Reason 
reasserted  itself  against  the  legends  of  the  Middle  Ages;  that  of 
Deism  in  the  eighteenth  century,  when,  after  the  awakening  of  the 
sciences,  Reason  began  to  know  the  laws  of  the  universe.  But  these 
crises  took  place  among  a  small  elite.  Orthodox  Christianity  was 
still  very  powerful.  It  was  able  to  dominate  Reason,  as  yet  poorly 
armed.  At  the  present  day  the  solutions  of  the  problems  of  Jesus 
are  very  clear,  and  those  Roman  institutions,  the  Index  and  the 
Inquisition,  can  no  longer  shackle  the  liberty  of  the  press.  Sapped 
in  its  historical  bases,  the  Roman  Church,  like  other  orthodoxies  less 
marked,  will  be  obliged  to  become  a  small  sect  or  to  adapt  herself  to 
new  religious  conceptions. 

But  can  the  Roman  Church  thus  adapt  herself?  The  Church 
which  declares  herself  infallible,  which  imposes  as  dogmas  so  many 
historical  errors,  which  utters  her  anathema  on  all  attempts  at  a  new 
interpretation, — the  Church  of  Rome,  is  she  not  petrified?  Can 
any  one  hope  for  a  different  line  of  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  popes 
of  the  future?  There  have  been  learned  popes,  tolerant  popes, 
even  sceptical  popes.  What  attitude  have  they  taken  toward  the 
truth  ?  What  attitude  have  they  taken  toward  charity,  and  especially 
toward  the  important  question  of  the  reunion  of  Christianity?  As 
a  great  historian  has  said,  "It  is  not  always  the  same  pope,  but  it  is 
always  the  same  papacy. " 

But  confronting  the  papacy  are  no  longer  the  humble,  respectful, 
timid  men  of  former  times.  The  new  generation  is,  above  all, 
logic  and  fond  sincerity.  In  response  to  the  refusal  of  the  papacy 
we  hear  to-day  in  France  the  outcry  of  the  modern  spirit:  "The 
Church  does  not  admit  that  she  is  mistaken,  she  does  not  retreat 
from  a  false  opinion.     To  those  who  demonstrate  her  in  error  she 


239 

responds  with  an  anathema.  Rather  than  extend  a  hand  to  Justice 
she  embraces  Fatality.  For  this  no  mercy  will  be  shown  her,  and 
she  will  drink  to  the  brim  the  chalice  of  her  stupidities  and  her 
adulteries." 

O  sons  and  heritors  of  the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century! 
You  see  beginning  in  this  Church  of  Rome,  which  condemned 
your  fathers  without  listening  to  them, — you  see  beginning,  I  repeat, 
a  religious  struggle  better  informed  and  more  radical  than  that  of 
Wickliffe,  of  John  Huss,  of  Luther,  and  of  Calvin.  Great  is  the 
sorrow  and  distress  of  us  who  see  crashing  down  upon  us  the  ancient 
and  venerable  dome  under  which  we  had  believed  we  might  safely 
remain.  For  you,  who  have  never  considered  Rome  as  the  whole 
Church  and  have  held  her  action  to  be  often  only  a  tyrannical  op- 
pression,— for  you  there  is  nothing  surprising  in  our  destruction, 
our  sufferings,  and  the  struggles  which  we  must  encounter.  Your 
fathers  and  you,  even  you,  have  known  the  same  vicissitudes,  and 
in  the  sweat  of  your  brow  and  the  tears  of  your  heart  have  recon- 
structed for  yourselves  religious  shelters  where  you  live  in  peace 
and  full  of  energy  for  the  service  of  God  and  of  humanity.  In  our 
present  anguish  your  experience  remains  our  encouragement  and 
our  hope. 


240 


FIFTH  AND  CLOSING  SESSION  OF  THE  INTER- 
NATIONAL CONFERENCE,  SANDERS  THEATRE, 
HARVARD  UNIVERSITY,  SEPTEMBER  26,  10  a.m. 

President  S.  A.  Eliot. — The  Council  will  come  to  order.  We 
will  have  for  our  presiding  officer  this  morning  a  former  governor 
of  Massachusetts,  a  former  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  president  of  the 
Board  of  Overseers  of  Harvard  University, — Hon.  John  D.  Long. 
[Applause.] 

Mr.  Long  took  the  chair,  and  spoke  as  follows: — 

The  time  has  come  in  the  progress  of  this  International  Con- 
gress of  Liberal  Religions,  in  which  we  are  all  so  much  interested,  to 
welcome  it  to  this  most  ancient  of  American  universities,  which,  by 
the  way,  recognizes  liberal  religion  as  the  highest  education,  and 
especially  to  welcome  here  the  members  of  this  Congress  from  other 
lands  than  our  own, — other,  however,  only  in  territorial  boundary, 
not  in  the  sympathy  of  thought  and  culture  and  ideal.  It  is  of  course 
fitting  that  this  welcome  should  be  given  by  the  head  of  this  univer- 
sity. It  is  not  necessary  that  I  should  introduce  him,  for  he  is  known 
the  wide  world  over.  I  need  only  name  him, — President  Eliot  of 
Harvard  University.    [Applause.] 

CHARLES  W.  ELIOT,  LL.D. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — There  cannot  be  a  place 
in  the  wide  world  where  a  great  body  of  religious  liberals  can  be 
more  welcome  than  at  Harvard  University.  The  principles  which 
unite  this  Congress,  these  believers,  are  the  principles  on  which  Har- 
vard University  was  founded  and  has  ever  lived, — pure  religion,  per- 
fect freedom,  voluntary  co-operation  in  service  to  mankind. 

Pure  religion.  You  may  read  on  the  college  gates  declaration 
of  the  purpose  for  which  this  institution  was  founded:    "In  order 


241 

that  the  churches  may  not  be  left  to  an  illiterate  ministry  when  our 
present  ministry  shall  lie  in  the  dust."  There  was  the  fundamental 
motive  for  the  establishment  of  this  institution  in  1636.  Our  ances- 
tors came  hither  in  search  of  religious  liberty:  they  also  met  to  find 
here  political  liberty.  They  also  had  in  mind,  and  their  descend- 
ants have  always  kept  in  mind,  that  perfect  liberty  is  individual 
liberty.  Not  liberty  for  a  class,  not  liberty  for  a  tribe  or  a  nation  or 
any  section  of  mankind,  but  perfect  liberty  is  individual  liberty. 

I  venture  to  think  that  pure  religion  is  also  individual.  What  is 
the  best  definition  of  religion  that  mankind  has  invented  in  2700 
years?  Micah's  "To  do  justly,  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly 
with  thy  God, " — not  our  God,  not  your  God,  but  thy  God, — the 
individual  God,  different  for  every  individual.  Can  we  imagine 
that  Moses  and  Aristotle  and  Saint  Augustine,  Luther,  Pasteur,  Dar- 
win, worshipped  the  same  God?  Their  ideas  of  God  were  their 
own,  individual,  different,  and  all  that  pure  religion  requires  of  us 
is  that  each  should  walk  humbly  with  his  own  God. 

Now  Harvard  is  intensely  individualistic,  because  we  have  always 
believed  in  individual  liberty  and  individual  religion.  Therefore, 
we  welcome  here  all  religions,  all  types  of  the  Christian  religion,  and, 
in  addition,  the  Jewish,  the  Buddhist,  the  Confucian,  every  mode 
in  which  men  may,  each  for  himself,  walk  humbly  with  his  God. 

I  listened  with  great  admiration  to  the  address  given  on  Monday 
by  Dr.  George  Gordon.  He  spoke  of  the  very  significant  principle 
that  religion  and  liberty  going  together  meant  considerateness, 
tenderness  towards  others,  not  assumption  of  power  or  pride  of 
opinion,  but  liberty  with  religion  should  be  humble.  That  is  exactly 
what  we  try  to  teach  in  Harvard  University  concerning  liberty  and 
concerning  religion.  We  believe  with  the  prophet  Micah  that  every 
religious  man  and  every  free  man  walks  humbly  with  his  God.  And, 
then,  you  must  have  all  observed  that  in  several  of  the  addresses 
made  before  the  Congress  there  has  been  a  tendency  to  desire  for 
religious  liberals  something  more  than  what  has  been  mentioned  as 
the  product  of  "the  cool  reason."  There  has  been  expressed  a  long- 
ing for  the  warmth  and  glow  of  faith  and  belief  and  hope  and  happy 
expectation.  Now  every  university  must  say  Amen  to  that  longing, 
and  for  a  university  it  is  more  than  a  longing,  it  is  a  confident  belief. 
The  university  stores  up  acquired  knowledge,  and  maintains  care- 


242 

ful  methods  of  diffusing  and  perpetuating  that  knowledge.  This 
knowledge  is  fact  or  truth,  and  precious  indeed  is  the  deposit.  But 
the  university  does  much  more  and  something  much  greater.  It 
knows  the  power  of  the  human  imagination,  it  knows  that  the  human 
imagination  has  invented,  discovered,  created,  all  letters,  numbers, 
arts,  trades,  societies,  poetry,  philosophy,  governments,  and  religions. 
These  are  all  the  products  of  this  ineffable  human  imagination.  Can 
there  be  any  place  in  the  world  where  the  power  of  the  imagination 
is  more  clearly  understood  and  more  reverently  cherished  than  in  a 
university?  At  any  rate,  in  Harvard  University  we  know,  study, 
honor,  and  almost  worship  this  power  of  the  human  imagination. 
But  we  believe  that  in  religion,  just  as  in  science,  the  processes  of 
asserting  truth  and  of  belief,  hope,  expectation,  faith,  are  different, 
and  that  for  the  progress  of  the  truth  and  the  increase  of  the  power 
of  the  imagination  this  distinction  should  be  carefully  observed,  in 
religion  as  well  as  in  research  and  investigation.  This  distinction  I 
have  sometimes  felt  religious  liberals,  like  many  other  people,  were 
in  danger  of  losing  sight  of.  We  know  in  the  university  that  the 
progress  of  exact  science  is  dependent  on  the  play  of  the  human 
imagination.  But  we  know,  too,  that,  when  the  imagining  genius 
throws  his  searchlight  out  into  the  enveloping  fogs,  at  every  moment 
he  must  submit  his  glimpse  of  what  he  thinks  he  sees  to  the  tests  of 
subsequent  observation,  to  the  test  of  the  cool  reason.  It  is  just 
so  with  liberal  religion.  The  hope,  expectation,  visions,  of  relig- 
ion should  be  all  the  time  submitted  to  the  tests  of  the  sincere, 
candid,  truth-loving  reason. 

The  Chairman. — A  report  will  now  be  made  by  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions  by  its  Chairman,  Rev.  Valentine  D.  Davis,  of  London, 
editor  of  the  Inquirer. 

Mr.  Davis. — Sir,  I  have  the  honor  on  behalf  of  the  Committee 
on  Resolutions  to  present  for  your  acceptance  three  separate  resolu- 
tions. The  first  is  a  pious  aspiration  in  which  we  invite  the  mem- 
bers of  this  Congress  all  to  unite, — 

That  the  members  of  this  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals, 
assembled  in  Boston  September  22-27,  send  greetings  to  those  who  in  all  lands 


243 

are  striving  to  unite  pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty,  and  a  message  of  special 
sympathy  and  encouragement  to  those  who  labor  amid  difficulty  and  hard- 
ship in  lonely  places,  that  they  may  stand  fast  and  realize  the  greatness  of  the 
fellowship  to  which  they  belong.     [Applause.] 

The  second  resolution  is  one  in  which  we  invite  the  guests  of  this 
Congress,  the  guests  of  Boston,  to  unite.  It  is  impossible  for  us  to 
put  into  words  what  we  feel  as  to  the  manner  in  which  we  have  been 
received  here  by  the  city  of  Boston  and  our  friends.  But  we  coujd 
not  be  content  to  leave  the  city  without  some  expression  of  our  feel- 
ing, and  it  is  put  into  the  words  of  this  resolution: — 

That  the  members  of  this  Congress,  the  fourth  biennial  gathering  organized 
by  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Think- 
ers and  Workers,  having  been  received  in  Boston  with  boundless  hospitality, 
desire  to  express  their  heartfelt  gratitude  to  all  who  have  contributed  to  the  signal 
success  and  happiness  of  these  days  of  meeting,  and  especially  to  the  Hon. 
Curtis  Guild,  Jr.,  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  for  his  cordial  reception  of  the 
Congress;  to  the  ministers  and  members  of  the  churches  of  Boston  and  the 
vicinity;  to  the  President  of  Harvard  and  other  members  of  the  university 
for  their  much-appreciated  welcome;  and,  finally,  to  the  members  of  the  Exec- 
utive and  other  Local  Committees  under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  Samuel  A.  Eliot, 
the  President,  and  the  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte,  the  devoted  Secretary  of  the 
Council.     [Long  applause.] 

The  third  resolution  is  concerned  with  the  future: — 

That  the  next  meeting  of  the  International  Council  be  held  in  the  year  19 10, 
the  centenary  of  the  birth  of  Theodore  Parker  and  the  four  hundredth  anni- 
versary of  the  birth  of  Francis  David,  the  martyr  bishop  of  the  Unitarians  of 
Hungary; 

That  the  invitation  received  from  the  Protestantenverein  and  other  liberal 
associations  of  Germany  to  hold  the  next  meeting  in  Berlin  be  cordially  ac- 
cepted.    [Applause.] 

The  resolutions   submitted  were  adopted  by  a  unanimous  vote. 

The  Chairman: — "John  Calvin  and  the  Reformation  Monument 
in  Geneva."  An  address  under  this  title  will  now  be  given  by 
Professor  Montet,  of  Geneva,  whom  I  have  the  pleasure  to  present 
to  you. 


244 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND    THE    REFORMATION    MONU- 
MENT AT  GENEVA,  SWITZERLAND  * 

BY   PROFESSOR   EDOUARD  MONTET,   D.D.,   OF   GENEVA. 

In  speaking  of  Calvin  before  an  assembly  like  this, — an  assembly 
which,  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  is  composed  of  the  representatives  of 
so  many  different  churches,  even  of  different  religions,  bears  solemn 
witness  to  the  eternal  principle  of  freedom  of  religious  thought, — 
I  feel  that  an  imperative  duty  is  laid  upon  me,  first  of  all,  to  condemn 
in  the  great  Reformer  of  the  sixteenth  century  what  is  deserving  of 
condemnation.  What  we  condemn  in  Calvin  is  that  narrow  dog- 
matism, so  intolerant,  which  led  him  into  the  worst  excesses  of  per- 
secution; also  the  dogma  of  predestination  which  sharply  divided 
humanity  into  two  distinct,  irreducible  categories,  and  offered  as 
the  only  justification  of  so  terrible  a  decree — concerning  which  Calvin 
himself  said,  "  I  confess  it  must  fill  us  all  with  fear  and  trembling" — 
the  affirmation  that  it  was  the  will  of  God. 

What  we  condemn  in  Calvin,  I  say,  is  the  intolerance  inseparable 
from  his  theology,  which  has  been  one  of  the  bitterest  fruits  of  the 
propagation  of  Calvinism  wherever  it  has  spread. 

Just  as  in  Geneva  we  felt  the  need,  for  conscience'  sake,  of  erecting 
in  1903  a  monument  in  honor  of  Servetus  before  dreaming  of  erecting 
one  in  1909  in  honor  of  Calvin  and  the  Reformation,  so  for  me  it  is 
a  command  of  conscience  openly  to  break  with  the  intolerance  of 
the  Reformer  before  proceeding  to  make  an  apology  in  his  favor. 

How  can  a  Liberal  Protestant,  a  Unitarian,  a  disciple  of  Christ, 
free  from  all  dogmatic  bonds  and  from  all  narrowness  of  mind, 
undertake  an  apology  of  Calvin  ?  If  I  ask  this  question  at  the  outset 
of  my  address,  it  is  because,  in  Europe  at  least,  it  has  been  more 
than  once  put  to  me.  Various  liberal  religious  thinkers  in  Switzer- 
land, France,  Holland,  and  elsewhere,  have  not  concealed  their  sur- 

*A11  quotations  from  Calvin  are  taken  from  the  "Corpus  Reformatorum,"   edition  Baura, 
Cunitz,  and  Reuss. 


245 

prise  at  the  news  that  the  idea  of  a  monument  to  Calvin  and  the 
Calvinistic  Reformation  took  its  rise  (for  such  was  the  case)  amongst 
the  liberal  religious  section  of  the  Church.  And,  more,  it  must  be 
admitted  that  not  a  few  Liberal  Protestants  gave  it  a  cool  reception, 
manifesting  an  evident  lukewarmness  in  the  enterprise,  especially 
when  it  became  a  question  of  contributing  to  its  realization. 

As  for  me,  Liberal  Protestant  as  I  am,  I  yet  feel  perfectly  free  to 
speak  in  praise  of  Calvin,  and  it  is  for  the  express  purpose  of  showing 
the  perfect  freedom  with  which  I  do  so  that  I  desired  to  condemn 
at  the  outset  what  in  Calvin  and  his  doctrine  ought  to  be  con- 
demned. 

Yes,  through  the  centuries  which  separate  us  men  of  the  twentieth 
century  from  our  religious  ancestors  of  the  sixteenth,  through  the 
lapse  of  time  which  has  toned  down  differences  and  righted  all  things, 
the  Unitarians  and  Independent  Religious  Thinkers  of  to-day, 
forgetting  the  intolerance  from  which  they  have  suffered,  and  judging 
doctrines  with  the  impartiality  of  the  historian  of  dogmas,  can  reach 
out  a  hand  of  fellowship  to  Calvin  and  his  followers,  and  call  to  them 
across  the  ages:  "You  and  we  both  belong  to  the  same  spiritual 
lineage:  you  and  we  are,  in  fact,  children  of  the  Reformation.  It  is, 
in  truth,  the  same  religious  work  which  you  started  and  undertook 
which  we  are  carrying  on  and  which  we  shall  accomplish.  It  is 
the  eternal  gospel,  of  which  we  are,  after  you  and  with  you,  the 
apostles  and  preachers." 

I. 

The  first  bond  between  Calvinism  and  Unitarianism  is  the  master 
conception  of  the  theology  of  the  great  Reformer;  namely,  the 
Sovereignty  0}  God. 

Doubtless  the  Deity  of  Calvin's  theology  is  Trinitarian,  and  implies 
the  absolute  divinity  of  Jesus. 

To  us,  on  the  other  hand,  God  is  One,  and,  however  sublime  the 
rank  we  assign  to  the  person  of  Jesus,  we  attribute  to  him  in  no  degree 
the  character  of  Deity. 

But  it  is  neither  at  the  Trinitarian  nor  the  Unitarian  point  of  view 
that  we  have  to  place  ourselves  in  treating  the  question  of  the  Divine 
Sovereignty.    The  opposition,  in  itself  so  radical,  between  the  dogmas 


246 

of  Trinitarianism  and  Unitarianism  does  not  enter  into  the  question 
here.  The  important  thing  is  that,  by  Calvin  as  by  us,  God  is  re- 
garded as  All-Powerful,  whatever  may  be  our  conception  of  his 
nature  and  essence.  In  reality,  Calvin  was  as  convinced  of  the 
Sovereignty  of  God  as  is  the  Mussulman,  who,  like  the  Unitarian,  is 
out  and  out  monotheistic. 

"The  power  of  God,"  says  Calvin,  "is  manifested  in  His  creation 
and  continual  government  of  the  world"  (I.  C,  i.  5).  "In  fact,  the 
Lord  takes  to  Himself  omnipotence,  and  His  will  is  that  we  should 
recognize  it  in  Him.  Ruler  of  heaven  and  earth  by  His  providence, 
He  so  nearly  measures  all  things  with  His  compass  that  nothing  hap- 
pens which  has  not  been  decreed  by  Him  (Ps.  115:  5).  For,  when 
He  says  in  the  Psalm  that  He  does  all  He  wills,  He  says  it  with  un- 
wavering determination  and  deliberate  intention"  (I.  C,  i.  16,  3). 
The  will  of  God  is  the  first  and  sovereign  Cause  of  all  things,  for 
nothing  happens  without  His  will  and  permission. 

On  this  declaration  of  the  Sovereignty  of  God  I  am  at  one  with 
Calvin,  and  consequently  could  not  accept  the  theories  of  some 
modern  theologians  as  to  the  limitation  of  the  Divine  Power. 

An  eminent  Christian  thinker,  Pastor  Wilfred  Monod,  well  known 
in  French  Protestant  churches  for  his  breadth  of  thought,  his  zeal  in 
furthering  the  cause  of  Christian  socialism,  and  likewise  the  boldness 
of  his  dogmatic  theories,  affirms  that  God,  as  we  know  Him,  and  to 
the  degree  in  which  we  can  follow  His  action  in  the  universe  and  in 
society,  is  powerless,  and  has  need  of  our  co-operation  in  order  to 
triumph  over  sinful  humanity,  and  that,  as  a  consequence,  the  power 
of  God  increases  and  extends  in  proportion  as  we  lend  Him 
our  aid. 

I  am  quite  willing  to  admit  the  originality  of  this  point  of  view, 
and  I  realize  in  a  measure  that  the  social  evils,  to  the  cure  of  which 
Mr.  Monod  is  so  devoted,  may  well  suggest  to  the  sensitive  and 
thoughtful  mind  such  an  hypothesis  as  a  limitation  of  the  Divine 
Power.  But,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I  could  not  bend  the  knee  to 
an  infirm  and  powerless  Deity,  and  from  my  point  of  view  such  an 
imperfect  human  conception  of  God  is  anthropomorphic. 

No!  I  can  only  conceive  of  God  as  omnipotent,  as  absolutely 
sovereign,  and  on  this  question  of  the  Divine  Sovereignty  I  remain 
as  uncompromising  as  the  authors  of  Deuteronomy  or  of  the  Second 


247 

Isaiah,  the  leading  representatives  of  Monotheism  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, and  I  am  prepared  to  repeat  with  the  disciple  of  Mahomet, 
"God  is  the  Mighty  (El  'Aziz),  the  Powerful  (El  Kddir),  and  every- 
thing, absolutely  everything,  is  under,  absolutely  under  His  om- 
nipotent control." 

The  dogma  of  predestination  is  the  form  par  excellence  under 
which  Calvin  affirms  the  Sovereignty  of  God. 

A  few  quotations  from  the  "Institutes"  may  not  be  out  of  place 
here : — 

"That  the  gospel  of  life,"  writes  Calvin,  "is  not  to  be  freely 
preached  to  all  the  world,  and  that  even  where  it  is  preached  all  are 
not  to  receive  it,  in  this  diversity  there  appears  an  admirable  secret  of 
the  judgment  of  God,  for  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  only  ac- 
cording to  His  good  pleasure.  ...  It  is  evident  that  it  is  ordained 
by  the  Divine  Will  that  Salvation  should  be  offered  to  some  and 
foreclosed  to  others"  (I.  C,  iii.  21,  1). 

"  We  affirm,  then,  as  the  Scripture  has  evidently  shown,  that  God 
has  once  predestinated  in  His  eternal  and  immutable  counsel  those 
He  desires  to  save  and  those  He  desires  to  send  to  perdition"  (I.  C, 
iii.  21,  7). 

"And  what  I  affirm  should  not  seem  strange:  the  fact  is,  God 
not  only  foresaw  the  fall  of  the  first  man,  and  in  his  fall  the  ruin  of 
the  whole  of  his  posterity,  but  He  predestinated  it"  (I.  C,  iii.  23,  7). 

It  follows  from  these  passages,  as  well  as  from  the  whole  tenor  of 
Calvin's  theology,  that  original  sin,  "that  hereditary  corruption  and 
perversity  of  our  nature,  which  renders  us  deserving  of  the  wrath  of 
God"  (I.  C.,  ii.  1,  8),  and  predestination,  which  is,  in  reality,  but 
another  way  of  putting  the  same  thought,  only  throw  into  full  light 
the  Sovereignty  of  God  who  by  an  absolute  act  of  His  will  pre- 
determined the  fall  of  the  first  man,  and  consequently  of  the  whole 
of  the  human  race,  and  sovereignly  predestinated  some  to  eternal 
life  and  others  to  eternal  perdition. 

I  am  not  seeking  here  to  raise  the  question  of  the  contradictions 
contained  in  the  Calvinistic  conceptions  of  original  sin  and  pre- 
destination. I  am  looking  at  the  subject  from  a  higher  point  of  view, 
and  trying  to  disengage  what  may  be  called  the  philosophy  of  these 
dogmas. 


248 

Inspired  by  the  true  Christian  spirit,  I  would  seek  for  the  soul  of 
truth  embedded  in  these  erroneous  doctrines,  and  under  the  form  in 
which  the  great  Reformer  has  expressed  them.  For  an  error  which 
has  dominated  the  thought  of  successive  generations  has  only  done 
so  by  virtue  of  the  element  of  eternal  truth  of  which  it  is  the  im- 
perfect embodiment  or  travesty. 

The  truth  at  the  bottom  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination  is  just 
this  belief  in  the  Divine  Sovereignty  and  Providence,  to  which  all 
here  can  subscribe.  It  was  because  Calvin  was  profoundly  convinced 
that  God  reigns  over  the  world  and  humanity,  it  was  because  this 
conviction  was  so  deeply  rooted  in  his  conscience,  that  his  religious 
genius,  nourished  on  the  Bible,  to  which  he  attributed  an  absolute 
authority,  was  at  first  led  little  by  little,  and  then  urged  on  to  rear 
the  whole  structure  of  Christian  theology  on  the  foundation  of  the 
dogma  of  predestination. 

I  am  happy  to  be  able  to  quote,  in  support  of  what  I  am  here 
bringing  forward,  the  opinions  of  two  men  of  widely  different  tenden- 
cies of  thought,  one  a  native  of  your  own  country  and  the  other 
a  native  of  mine. 

Mr.  Edwin  D.  Mead,  of  Boston,  in  a  speech  he  delivered  in  Geneva 
at  the  Palais  Eynard  in  1905,  a  speech  which  was  heartily  applauded, 
said,  "Do  not  forget  that  to  Calvin  the  doctrine  of  predestination 
meant  specially  the  Providence  of  God"  ("  Actes  du  3e  Congres  In- 
ternational du  Christianisme  Liberal  et  Progressif , "  p.  64). 

A  few  years  before,  in  1901,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  repre- 
sentatives of  aggressive  orthodoxy  in  France,  Professor  Doumergue, 
the  author  of  a  masterly  work  on  Calvin,  which  is  now  in  process  of 
publication,  declared  in  an  assembly  of  students  at  Geneva,  in  which 
I  had  the  honor  to  take  part,  that  "to  Calvin  the  doctrine  of  pre- 
destination was  but  an  expression  of  the  idea  of  providence." 


II. 

Faith  in  the  sovereignty  of  God  is  not  the  only  point  of  contact 
between  Calvin  and  Liberal  Protestants  and  Free  Religious  Thinkers. 
There  are  other  bonds  which  unite  us  to  the  great  Reformer  and  his 
school,  and  I  desire  to  bring  before  you  what  is,  historically  speaking, 


249 

a  new  fact  which  of  itself  is  enough  to  explain  the  line  of  descent  of 
the  Unitarians  in  English-speaking  countries  from  the  Puritans. 

This  fact  may  be  denned  thus:  Calvinism,  by  its  narrow  and  in- 
tolerant dogmatics,  by  its  uncompromising  religious  and  ecclesiastical 
spirit,  has  produced  men  of  will  and  action.  It  has  communicated 
to  its  disciples  a  germ,  so  to  speak,  of  that  sovereignty  of  will  which 
it  attributes  in  so  peremptory  a  manner  to  God.  To  employ  a  char- 
acteristic French  expression,  Calvinism,  by  its  very  intolerance, 
"has  carved  men  out  of  one  solid  block  of  spiritual  substance,"  men 
of  inflexible  will.  Islam,  too,  with  its  unyielding  monotheism,  its 
doctrine  of  fatality  which  has  found  in  the  East  so  many  defenders, 
has  produced  the  same  results.  It  also  has  given  birth  to  men  of 
iron  will. 

And  here  we  put  our  finger,  so  to  speak,  on  what  has  been  called 
the  vertus-defauts  (defects  of  the  virtues)  of  Calvinism. 

The  dogmatic  narrowness  of  orthodox  Calvinists,  the  conviction 
that  they  alone  were  in  possession  of  religious  truth,  and  that  beyond 
their  church  and  creed  there  was  naught  but  error  and  darkness; 

their  belief  in 

"The  little  garden  walled  around, 
Chosen  and  made  peculiar  ground"; 

their  assurance  of  their  own  salvation  and  their  certitude  of  their 
own  election, — in  a  word,  that  agglomeration  of  convictions  in  which 
the  true  and  the  false  were  evidently  mixed,  but  which  was  dominated 
by  a  willing  release  from  evil  and  a  passionate  desire  after  good, — 
that  ensemble  of  convictions,  I  say,  forged  characters  of  iron  and 
steel. 

It  is  said  that  on  his  death-bed  Cromwell  asked  his  chaplain,  "Is 
is  possible  to  fall  from  a  state  of  grace  when  one  has  once  been  in 
it?"  "No,  my  lord,"  replied  the  minister.  "Well,"  added  Crom- 
well, "  I  am  sure  that  I  was  once  in  a  state  of  grace."  *  This  episode 
and  these  declarations  are  an  historical  demonstration  of  the  truth 
for  which  we  are  here  contending. 

It  is  in  this  irresistible  strength  of  will,  the  source  of  which  is  in 
Calvin's  doctrine,  that  we  find  the  foundations  of  more  than  one 
state  and  republic. 

*  Guizot,  "Histoire  de  la  Republique   d'Angleterre  et  de  Cromwell"  (1640-58),  vol.  ii.  p. 
393.     Paris,  1854.    This  fact  is  attested  by  numerous  English  historians. 


250 

Such  was  the  Republic  of  the  Seven  Provinces.  It  was  not  till 
after  William  the  Silent  (1584)  had  embraced  Calvinistic  Protes- 
tantism and  had  become  leader  of  the  Gueux  in  1572  that  the  Union 
of  Utrecht  named  him,  in  1579,  stadtholder,  and  that  later,  in  1581, 
the  Republic  was  founded.  Such,  too,  was  England  during  the 
Protectorate  (1653  to  1658)  under  Cromwell,  that  zealous  Cal- 
vinist. 

Such  were  the  Puritan  States  successively  established  in  America 
by  the  followers  of  Calvin:  in  1630  in  Massachusetts;  in  1636  in 
Connecticut;  in  1638  in  Rhode  Island,  Maine,  New  Hampshire, — 
States  which  formed  in  1650  the  Federation  of  the  United  Colonies 
of  New  England. 

Such  also  in  more  recent  times  were  the  Transvaal  and  Orange 
Republics,  founded  in  1834  by  the  Calvinistic  Boers,  partly  of  Dutch 
origin  and  partly  descendants  from  the  French  Huguenots. 

M.  Brunetiere,  in  a  brilliant  lecture  on  Calvin  and  the  Reformation 
delivered  in  Geneva  a  few  years  ago  (1901),  said  that  Calvin  had, 
if  I  may  be  allowed  the  word,  aristocratized  religion.  Mixing  up, 
in  the  principle  of  his  Reformation,  politics  and  ethics,  Calvin,  by  his 
religious  and  moral  severity,  could  not  but  establish  the  most  authori- 
tative of  rules,  alike  in  Church  and  State. 

Without  doubt,  he  was  authoritative  in  these  two  domains.  In- 
deed, he  was  so  by  nature,  by  intellectual  temperament,  and  in  the 
very  native  hue  of  his  resolution. 

But  the  fact  remains,  not  less  certain,  that  his  Reformation,  as  the 
statements  we  have  brought  forward  prove,  eventuated  in  the  De- 
mocracy. 

In  Calvinism  the  democratic  form  of  government,  both  in  State 
and  in  Church,  proceeds  from  the  principle  of  equality  between  all 
behevers,  resulting  from  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Divine 
Sovereignty. 

Professor  Osgood,  an  American  author,  writes:  "The  modern  revo- 
lutionary movement  began,  not  in  the  eighteenth,  but  in  the  sixteenth 
century.  Protestantism,  especially  in  the  form  which  Calvin  gave 
it,  was  hostile  to  absolutism,  both  in  Church  and  in  State,  and  carried 
with  it  a  moral  vigor  without  which  the  mere  revival  of  classical 
learning  would  have  been  powerless  to  effect  any  deep  social  changes. 


25i 

Calvinism  meant  democracy  in  church  government.  The  local 
church  furnished  a  much  better  model  than  any  Greek  state.  The 
theory  upon  which  it  was  based  was  easily  transferred  to  the  domain 
of  politics."* 

"Everywhere  where  Calvinism  has  spread,"  said  Mr.  E.  D.  Mead 
at  the  Palais  Eynard,  "it  has  sown  broadcast  the  seeds  of  democ- 
racy." 

This  remarkable  fact  is  visible  in  all  churches  of  Calvinistic  origin. 
Whether  we  turn  to  Knox  and  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  Scotland, 
to  the  Walloon  churches  in  Holland,  to  the  Reformed  churches  in 
France,  or  to  the  Calvinistic  communities  of  other  countries  in  Europe 
and  America,  we  find  that  the  ecclesiastical  polity  of  them  all  is 
democratic. 

The  last  and  profound  cause  of  all  these  events,  so  striking  both 
in  religious  and  political  polity,  was  undoubtedly  the  genius  of  Cal- 
vin, that  sculptor  of  strong  characters. 

From  this  point  of  view  Calvin  has  been  the  leader  of  Unitarian 
and  Liberal  Protestant  believers.  In  the  United  States  and  in 
England  the  Unitarians,  in  the  energy  of  their  will  to  live,  in  es- 
tablishing their  faith  and  church,  in  spite  of  all  the  difficulties  they 
encountered,  have  given  proof  that  they  were  men  of  indomitable 
force  of  character,  true  descendants  of  those  of  whom  your  poet  sings: 

"They  were  men  of  present  valor,  stalwart  old  iconoclasts, 
Unconvinced  by  axe  or  gibbet  that  all  virtue  was  the  Past's." 

Lowell. 

In  Europe  also  Liberal  Protestants  have  given  evidence  of  their 
vitality  by  the  capacity  to  survive  they  have  never  ceased  to  mani- 
fest. Everywhere  in  the  minority,  everywhere  resembling  "the  little 
one  that  afterwards  became  a  thousand,"  not  only  have  they  main- 
tained their  right  to  exist  as  churches,  but  they  have  compelled  the 
respect  and  consideration  of  the  orthodox  majority. 

It  is  for  the  reasons  we  have  here  enumerated,  on  the  one  hand 
the  spiritual  religious  ties  which  unite  us  to  Calvin,  on  the  other  the 
force  of  will  and  energy  of  character  we  have  inherited  from  him, — 

*  Quoted  by  J.  J.  Roget,  "The  Projected  International  Monument  to  the  Heroes  of  the 
Protestant  Reformation  at  Geneva,  a  Plea  for  Anglo-Saxon  Support"  (p.  24),  Geneva,  1907. 


252 

it  is  for  these  reasons,  I  say,  that  we  Liberal  Protestants  would  offer 
our  meed  of  praise  to  Calvin,  and  would  contribute  to  the  erection 
of  a  monument  in  honor  of  his  genius  and  his  Reformation  in  the 
ancient  Swiss  city  of  Geneva,  the  centre  of  his  activity. 

We  desire  to  invest  this  event  with  an  international  character  worthy 
of  it.  Calvin's  influence  has  been  world-wide.  Politically,  socially, 
and  religiously,  his  sanative  and  invigorating  spirit  has  breathed 
through  Europe  and  America,  and  modern  democracies  are  all, 
in  one  way  or  another,  inheritors  of  his  genius. 

We  desire  that  Calvinists  of  all  countries,  and  all  churches  of 
Calvinistic  descent,  should  take  part  with  us  in  this  work.  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  ancient  Calvinistic  faith,  believers  in  the  Trinity 
and  Predestination,  representatives  of  moderate  orthodoxy  who 
have  made  a  selection  from  the  dogmatic  faith  bequeathed  them  to 
Calvin,  representatives  of  modern  belief,  Unitarians  and  Liberal 
Protestants,  all  should  unite  in  this  act  of  gratitude  to  the  great 
Reformer  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

The  monument  which  will  be  erected  in  Geneva  in  1909  will  be 
the  testimony  of  all  the  spiritual  descendants  of  Calvin  to  that  prin- 
ciple of  liberation  from  all  religious  and  political  servitude  which 
is  the  manifest  result  of  the  work  accomplished  by  the  French  Refor- 
mation in  the  sixteenth  century. 

The  central  figure  of  the  monument  will,  of  course,  be  that  of 
Calvin  himself.  Around  this  central  figure  will  be  grouped  his  prin- 
cipal collaborators,  Farel,  Beza,  Knox,  etc.,  and  these  again  will  be 
surrounded  by  the  figures  of  great  Calvinistic  statesmen,  such  as 
William  the  Silent,  Cromwell,  Coligny,  and  one  of  the  great  Puritans 
of  New  England  and  others, — all  men  who  were  inspired  by  the 
spirit  of  the  Reformer  and  had  something  of  his  indomitable  will. 

These  were  all,  in  the  different  circumstances  in  which  they  were 
placed,  men  of  faith,  of  that  faith  of  which  Christ  said  "  it  could  re- 
move mountains." 

In  1909  we  shall  celebrate  a  double  anniversary  in  Geneva:  the 
fourth  centenary  of  the  birth  of  Calvin  (1509)  and  the  three  hundred 
and  fiftieth  anniversary  of  his  Academy,  to-day  the  university,  founded 
by  the  Reformer  in  1559.  The  foundation  stone  of  the  monument 
to  the  heroes  of  the  Reformation  will  be  laid  in  the  presence  of  a 
concourse  of  persons  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  and  we  shall  invite 


253 

to  the  glorious  three  hundred  and  fiftieth  anniversary  of  our  uni- 
versity representatives  from  all  sister  universities. 

Members  of  the  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals,  you 
will  be  present  on  that  occasion ;  for,  as  representatives  of  the  culture 
of  the  New  World,  your  place  will  be  with  us  at  Geneva  in  1909. 

Dr.  J.  M.  Whiton,  of  New  York. — Allow  me,  Mr.  President,  to 
present  the  following  resolutions: — 

Resolved,  That  this  Congress  has  learned  with  great  satisfaction  of  the  move- 
ment initiated  at  Geneva,  and  seconded  in  various  European  countries  and 
America,  to  mark  in  1909  the  four  hundredth  anniversary  of  the  birth  of  John 
Calvin  by  a  monument  in  that  city  commemorating  that  illustrious  man  and 
the  influences  proceeding  from  him,  and  from  the  great  men  to  whom  he  passed 
on  the  torch  of  progress  for  the  advancement  of  freedom,  education,  and  ethical 
religion. 

Recognizing  a  just  distinction  between  what  Calvin  inherited  from  his  great 
master  Augustine  and  what  he  himself  contributed  to  the  thought  of  his  time, 
and  in  view  of  the  latter  as  shared  consciously  or  unconsciously  by  the  freest 
and  most  catholic  religious  fellowship  of  to-day,  this  Congress  heartily  com- 
mends the  proposed  memorial  to  the  favorable  regard  and  co-operation  of  all 
who  stand  for  a  free  church  in  a  free  state,  for  individual  liberty  under  individ- 
ual responsibility,  and  for  the  religious  unity  of  all  faithful  souls. 

It  was  thought  best,  Mr.  Chairman,  by  the  committee  of  this 
Congress  that  with  this  resolution  should  be  coupled  another  which 
has  been  prepared  by  them,  and  which  in  conjunction  with  this  I 
will  proceed  to  read: — 

Resolved,  That  this  Congress  also  expresses  its  sympathy  with  the  action  taken 
toward  the  erection  of  a  monument  in  the  ancient  city  of  Vienne,  France,  in 
commemoration  of  its  former  distinguished  citizen  and  good  physician,  Michael 
Servetus,  the  martyr  to  freedom  of  thought  and  religious  veracity. 

The  Chairman. — The  question  is  upon  the  adoption  of  these  res- 
olutions. If  there  is  no  objection,  I  will  put  the  vote  on  them  both 
at  the  same  time. 

Voices. — Separately,  separately. 

The  Chairman. — There  is  objection.  The  question  is  upon  the 
adoption  of  the  first  resolution  with  reference  to  the  monument  to 
Calvin.     Those  in  favor  of  the  adoption  of  this  resolution  will  say 


254 

"Aye."  ["Aye."]  Those  opposed  will  say  "No."  ["No."]  It 
is  a  vote. 

The  question  is  upon  the  adoption  of  this  second  resolution. 
Those  in  favor  of  the  adoption  of  this  vote  will  say  "Aye."  ["Aye."] 
Those  opposed  will  say  "No."  [A  single  voice,  "No."]  It  is  a 
practically  unanimous  vote. 

"The  Tendency  of  Positive  Religions  to  Universal  Religion." 
Under  this  title  an  address  will  now  be  given  by  Professor  Pfleid- 
erer  of  Berlin.    [Applause.] 


255 


THE  TENDENCY  OF   POSITIVE  RELIGIONS  TO 
UNIVERSAL  RELIGION. 

BY  PROFESSOR  OTTO  PFLEIDERER,  UNIVERSITY  OF  BERLIN,  GERMANY. 

Until  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  it  was  generally  be- 
lieved that  the  history  of  religion  began  with  the  knowledge  and 
worship  of  the  one  true  God,  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  that 
the  many  false  or  heathen  religions  arose  later  through  apostasy 
and  deterioration  from  this  original  faith.  For  the  Church  this 
belief  was  grounded  and  established  upon  the  early  Biblical  narra- 
tives, according  to  which  God  revealed  himself  to  our  first  ancestors 
in  paradise  and  then  again  to  Noah,  the  father  of  all  who  survived 
the  deluge.  But  even  in  the  rationalistic  circles  of  the  so-called 
Illuminati,  whose  rise  dates  from  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
which  traced  the  origin  of  religion  not  to  a  positive,  primitive 
revelation,  but  to  the  innate  human  reason,  it  was  at  first  con- 
sidered self-evident  that  the  original  religion  of  humanity  could 
have  been  no  other  than  that  monotheistic  faith  which  alone  can 
satisfy  the  universal  reason  of  man.  The  origin  of  the  many 
different  heathen  religions  was  explained  as  the  result  of  human 
caprice  and  perverseness,  and  especially  the  deception  of  selfish 
priests,  by  which  the  truth  once  known  and  accepted  was  distorted 
and  corrupted. 

The  philosopher  and  historian,  David  Hume,  with  his  keen  in- 
tellect, was  the  first  to  see  that  this  theory  is  pure  fiction  and  utterly 
unhistorical.  He  distinguishes  between  the  basis  of  true  religion, 
which  is  certainly  the  reason,  and  the  origin  of  the  actual  religions 
of  the  peoples,  which  must  be  sought  on  the  irrational  side  of  human 
nature,  especially  in  the  feelings  of  fear  and  hope  and  in  fantasies 
of  the  imagination,  which  invented  beings  like  unto  men  as  the 
efficient  causes  of  those  natural  events  and  phenomena  whose  real 
causes  were  unknown.    Therefore,  the  primitive  religion  was  not 


256 

monotheism,  but  polytheism  and  animism,  or  the  belief  in  spirits, 
as  the  earliest  historic  reminiscences  of  mankind  everywhere  bear 
witness.  Only  later  on  did  monotheism  develop  out  of  polytheism, 
and  even  then  not  by  means  of  the  rational  observation  of  the  order 
of  nature,  but  owing  to  irrational  motives,  such  as  national  vanity, 
which  may  have  led  one  people  to  declare  its  god  to  be  the  highest 
and  finally  the  only  God,  or  to  interested  devotion,  which  led  to 
the  adulation  of  an  especially  beloved  divinity  in  higher  and  higher 
terms,  until  infinity  and  eternity  became  his  predicates  and  attributes. 
So  it  happened  that  ordinary  fear  and  adulation  accidentally  led  to 
the  same  result  as  reason  and  philosophy;  namely,  monotheism. 
But,  even  when  this  result  had  anywhere  been  attained,  human 
nature  proved  too  weak  to  adhere  to  it  permanently.  Man's 
imagination  and  his  need  of  communion  made  him  yearn  for  nearer 
and  more  approachable  gods,  to  mediate  between  the  supreme  God 
and  the  world.  In  practical  life  the  importance  of  these  mediatory 
beings  soon  surpassed  that  of  the  highest  God.  Thus  the  whole 
history  of  religion  oscillates  between  the  movement  toward  mono- 
theism and  the  tendency  towards  polytheism.  It  is  a  purposeless 
play  of  irrational  motives,  whose  results  only  accidentally  and  tem- 
porarily coincide  with  the  demands  of  reason.  According  to  this 
theory,  reason  is  wholly  without  influence  in  the  real  history  of 
religion,  although,  according  to  Hume's  own  premise,  she  is  the 
basis  of  true  religion. 

This  theory  is  undoubtedly  interesting.  It  is  equally  significant 
for  its  keen  insight  into  the  empirical  reality  of  the  historical  relig- 
ions, in  which  the  irrational  undeniably  plays  a  great  role,  as  well 
as  for  its  lack  of  understanding  of  the  inworking  and  co-operation 
of  reason  in  the  purposive  development  of  the  religions  upon  which 
their  growing  content  of  truth  and  real  value  rests.  Hume  has 
the  merit  of  having  set  up,  for  the  philosophy  of  religion  as  well  as 
for  epistemology,  the  problem  of  a  reconciliation  of  rationalism 
and  empiricism. 

German  philosophy,  since  Leibnitz,  has  been  at  work  on  the  solution 
of  this  problem.  According  to  Leibnitz,  the  positive  historical  relig- 
ions are  related  to  the  rational  kernel  of  religion,  just  as  accidental, 
empirical  truths  in  general  are  related  to  the  necessary  and  eternal 
truths  of  reason.     As  the  latter  virtually  exist  unconsciously  in  our 


257 

souls  from  the  beginning,  but  are  called  into  conscious  existence  only 
through  and  by  means  of  our  experience,  so  the  idea  of  God  as  the 
perfect  being  is  not  innate  in  the  mind  as  a  complete  cognition  or 
clear  perception,  but  as  an  unconscious  tendency,  which  becomes 
conscious  of  itself  in  the  experience  of  the  positive  religions,  which 
are  related  to  the  religion  of  reason  not,  as  the  English  and  French 
illuminati  thought,  as  contrast  or  contradiction,  but  as  the  neces- 
sary preparatory  stages  and  the  essential  means  to  the  realization 
of  the  latter.  As  the  confused  mental  presentations  of  actual  ex- 
perience furnish  the  material  out  of  which  the  clear  perceptions 
of  reason  must  be  developed,  so  the  presentative  forms  of  faith 
and  the  ceremonies  of  the  positive  religions  must  serve  as  the  means 
for  raising  the  mind  to  the  knowledge  of  the  religion  of  reason. 
Herein  lies  their  historical  justification  and  necessity,  and  also  their 
limitation  and  relativity.  Out  of  this  view  a  new  problem  arises 
for  the  philosophy  of  religion;  namely,  to  comprehend  the  positive 
religions  historically,  as  relatively  true  stages  in  the  development 
of  the  rational  religion  which  lies  concealed  in  them,  and  can  only 
realize  itself  through  them,  instead  of,  as  heretofore,  criticising  them 
and  measuring  them  by  our  preconceived  idea  of  the  religion  of 
reason,  only  to  condemn  them. 

Lessing  and  Herder  proceeded  still  further  in  this  direction. 
Lessing  viewed  the  history  of  religion  as  a  gradual  and  continually 
progressive  education  of  the  human  race  by  divine  revelation,  which 
adapted  and  accommodated  itself  to  the  gradual  growth  of  man's 
powers  of  comprehension;  that  is  to  say,  passed  through  a  process 
of  evolution  in  which  every  stage  contained  truth  commingled  with 
error.  This,  also,  holds  true  of  Biblical  religion;  for,  according  to 
Lessing,  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments  are  simply  two  primers 
of  the  divine  pedagogics,  for  the  elementary  instruction  of  the  race. 
They  both  contain  valuable  truths,  but  these  need  to  be  developed 
into  the  universal  truths  of  reason,  if  they  are  to  be  of  service  or 
benefit  to  mankind.  Out  of  a  Biblical  religion,  founded  upon  acci- 
dental historical  truths  and  such  heteronymous  motives  as  the  fear 
of  punishment  and  the  hope  of  reward,  Lessing  expected  the  devel- 
opment of  an  eternal  gospel  of  human  perfection,  in  which  the 
good  should  be  loved  and  done  for  its  own  sake.  Lessing  did  not 
identify  the  Biblical  Christianity  of  the  Church  with  the  universal 


258 

religion  of  reason,  but  considered  it  simply  as  the  highest  stage  in 
the  evolution  towards  this  ideal  goal.  Generally  speaking,  he  has 
also  succeeded  in  bringing  out  the  value  of  the  two  sides  of  the  con- 
ception of  the  relative  truth  and  the  temporary  stage  of  an  historical 
evolution  with  a  juster  sense  of  proportion  and  with  less  partisan 
feeling  than  many  who  have  come  after  him. 

Herder's  strength  lay  in  his  broad  sympathy,  which  enabled  him  to 
catch  the  accents  of  the  spirit  under  the  most  diverse  forms,  from  the 
hymns  of  the  nature  religions  to  the  lyrics  of  the  prophets  and  the 
psalm  singers  of  Israel  and  on  to  the  gospel  of  Jesus.  For  him 
Christianity  was  not  only  the  highest,  but  also  the  perfect  religion, 
and  identical  with  the  universal  religion  of  humanity.  The  small 
residue  of  positive  doctrine  which  could  not  be  resolved  into  universal 
religion  he  calmly  ignored  as  of  no  consequence. 

Kant,  on  the  contrary,  carrying  his  critical  method  into  the  domain 
of  religion,  emphasized  the  contrast  between  the  ideal  of  his  ethical 
religion  of  reason  and  the  positive  statutory  religions  so  strongly 
that  the  worth  of  the  pre-Christian  and  non-Christian  religions 
remained  altogether  doubtful.  He  would  almost  place  them  in  the 
category  of  religious  delusion  and  superstition.  Only  to  Christianity 
did  he  attribute  real  moral  value,  and  he  endeavored  to  interpret  its 
chief  dogmas  in  the  terms  of  his  ethical  idealism.  Nevertheless,  he 
would  have  us  distinguish  clearly  between  the  positive  ecclesiastical 
religion,  established  by  accidental  statutory  power,  and  the  one  uni- 
versally valid  faith  of  pure  reason.  These,  however,  are  not  mutually 
contradictory,  for  the  one  is  contained  in  the  other  in  germ  or  principle, 
and  therefore  even  the  accidental  statutory  forms  of  every  positive 
ecclesiastical  faith  possess  a  relative  right  and  worth  just  in  so  far 
as  they  are  utilized  as  serviceable  and  expedient  means  for  the  further- 
ance and  development  of  the  ethical  religion  of  reason,  as  means  which 
will  become  superfluous  in  time,  and  may  eventually  be  entirely 
dropped.  Yet  Kant  leaves  us  in  doubt  whether  the  positive  eccle- 
siastical religions  will  ever  pass  over  entirely  into  the  universal  religion 
of  reason  or  not.  The  only  thing  that  seemed  essential  to  him  was  that 
the  ideal  of  the  universal  religion  of  reason  should  remain  the  regu- 
lative principle  for  the  interpretation  and  the  further  development  of 
the  positive  ecclesiastical  faith. 

The  irrationalism  of  romanticism,  on  the  contrary,  would  have 


259 

nothing  to  do  with  any  universal  religion  of  reason,  not  even  in  the 
Kantian  sense  of  a  simply  regulative  ideal. 

Schleiermacher  declared  that  since  religion  is  the  feeling  excited  or 
aroused  in  the  individual  by  the  Whole,  there  can  be  none  but  positive 
religions,  of  which  there  must  be  indefinitely  many,  as  many  as  there 
are  peculiarly  impressed  or  influenced  individuals.  That  which  they 
hold  in  common  is  of  secondary  importance,  small  in  extent  and  of 
constantly  changing  dimensions,  and  rests  solely  upon  the  accidental 
affinities  of  souls  pitched  in  the  same  key.  In  this  view  the  distinc- 
tion between  true  and  false  also  disappears,  since  every  religion  is 
true  just  in  so  far  as  it  has  been  felt  and  experienced  as  a  fact  of 
consciousness.  But  every  religion  must  acknowledge  the  equal 
validity  of  an  infinite  number  of  other  religions  besides  itself,  just 
because  they  also  have  been  as  really  experienced  as  facts  of  feeling. 

From  the  origin  of  religion  in  irrational  feeling,  Hume  had  drawn 
the  pessimistic  conclusion  that  all  religions  are  equally  false.  From 
the  same  premise,  romanticism  drew  the  optimistic  conclusion  that  all 
are  equally  true.  This  judgment  was  very  soon  reversed  in  favor  of 
the  pessimistic  side  in  Feuerbach's  pathological  theory  of  religion. 
This  was  quite  natural,  for  on  the  purely  empirical  ground  of  irra- 
tional emotional  experience  we  are  left  without  any  criterion  for  the 
objective  determination  of  the  truth  and  value  of  the  psychological 
facts  which  are  given.  Nor  can  we  speak  here  of  the  evolutionary 
stages  and  relativity  of  religious  truth,  because  this,  too,  would  require 
some  universal  principle  or  ideal  to  serve  as  a  standard  of  values  for 
the  measurement  of  the  separate  phenomena. 

Thus  this  purely  positivistic  empiricism  proved  itself  as  incapable 
of  a  true  understanding  of  the  history  of  religion  as  the  rationalism  of 
the  illuminati,  which  was  based  upon  pure  abstractions  drawn  from 
the  facts  of  experience. 

Leibnitz  and  Lessing  hit  the  golden  mean  between  these  two 
extremes.  They  beheld  in  the  positive  religions  the  forms  and  the 
means  for  the  development  of  the  universal  religion  of  reason.  On 
this  path,  which  they  were  the  first  to  tread,  Hegel  has  travelled 
further. 

He  took  up  the  same  method,  and  carried  it  through  to  its  logical 
consequences.  Like  Hume,  Hegel  also  distinguished  between  the 
essential  foundations  of  religion  in  reason  and  its  actual  beginnings  in 


260 

history.  Hegel  felt  just  as  sure  as  Hume  that  the  primitive  religion 
was  not  the  religion  of  reason,  but  its  very  opposite.  But,  while 
Hume  saw  nothing  in  the  actual  history  of  religion  but  the  accidental 
and  irrational  play  of  human  passions  and  fictions,  Hegel  was  con- 
vinced that,  in  spite  of  the  irrationality  of  isolated  facts  and  appear- 
ances, that  which  is  reasonable  is  also  the  actual  in  history,  taken  as  a 
whole;  that  is  to  say,  reason  is  the  operative  and  regulative  principle  of 
the  evolution  from  the  unreason  of  nature  to  the  reasonableness  of  the 
spirit.  Just  as  he  interpreted  history  in  general  as  the  process  or 
method  of  the  self-realization  of  the  spirit,  out  of  and  by  means  of 
the  natural,  so  he  considered  the  history  of  religion  as  the  process 
of  the  evolution  of  the  religious  consciousness,  through  which  and 
in  which  the  human  spirit  gradually  becomes  conscious  of  its  essen- 
tial relationship  and  oneness  with  the  divine  spirit ;  or,  briefly,  as  the 
gradual  elevation  from  the  humanity  of  nature  to  a  divine  humanity. 
The  evolutionary  stages  in  this  process  are  the  positive  religions,  in 
which  the  religious  consciousness  expresses  itself  in  a  manifold  variety 
of  forms,  differentiated  according  to  different  peoples  and  times. 
Christianity  Hegel  considered  as  the  absolute  religion,  because  in  it 
humanity  had  arrived  at  the  consciousness  of  its  true  relation  to  God. 
But  even  within  Christianity  itself  this  evolution  must  be  continued, 
because  even  here  the  truth,  though  present  in  principle,  is  neverthe- 
less still  veiled  or  concealed  under  the  symbolical  forms  of  the  eccle- 
siastical dogmas  and  cult.  Thus,  according  to  Hegel  as  well  as 
Lessing  and  Kant,  it  becomes  the  task  of  the  philosophy  of  religion 
to  interpret  the  ecclesiastical  articles  of  faith  in  such  a  way  that  the 
content  of  truth  which  they  contain  and  conceal  may  be  brought 
clearly  into  consciousness.  The  positive  ecclesiastical  forms  are  not  an 
end  in  themselves,  they  are  not  truth  itself,  but  they  are  the  means 
which  subserve  the  continually  progressive  evolution  of  the  truth. 
The  universal  truth  of  reason  is  the  ideal  and  the  regulative  principle 
for  the  criticism  and  treatment  of  the  accidental  historical  forms, 
which  per  se  can  have  only  limited  validity. 

Since  Hegel's  time  our  knowledge  of  the  history  of  religion  and 
the  materials  for  such  a  science  have  increased  so  considerably  that 
the  details  of  his  philosophy  of  religion  may  be  considered  as  anti- 
quated. But  it  does  not  follow  by  any  means  that  the  idea  of  devel- 
opment— which,  like  a  scarlet  thread,  runs  through  the  whole  of 


26l 

German  philosophy  since  Leibnitz — must  be  given  up.  On  the 
contrary,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  more  massive  this  historical  material 
grows  and  the  more  difficult  it  becomes  to  orient  ourselves  in  this 
labyrinth  of  infinitely  manifold  details  and  introduce  order  into 
this  chaos,  the  more  urgent  becomes  our  need  of  the  Ariadne's 
thread  of  a  reasonable  teleology.  But  of  course  the  peculiar  form 
which  the  idea  of  development  has  assumed  in  the  dialectic  method 
of  Hegel  has  now  been  given  up  entirely:  his  construction  of  history 
as  the  logical  dialectics  of  ideas  changing  into  their  antitheses  is 
rightly  considered  nowadays  as  an  arbitrary  violation  of  actual 
history;  but  it  does  not  therefore  follow  that  we  should  not  look 
for  any  rational  development  in  history,  but  simply  that  we  must 
understand  it  more  clearly,  that  we  must  observe  the  real  factors 
and  impelling  forces  of  this  evolution  more  closely  than  was  the 
case  in  speculative  idealism.  In  the  same  way  the  old  nature  phi- 
losophy of  Schelling  has  had  to  give  way  to  the  exact  sciences,  but 
its  central  thought  of  development  has  triumphantly  come  to  its 
own  in  Darwin's  theory  of  descent,  though  in  a  new  form  more 
consonant  with  and  adequate  to  the  facts,  in  so  far  as  real  vital 
forces  and  their  struggle  for  existence  has  stepped  into  the  place 
of  the  logical  categories.  If  we  apply  this  analogy  in  the  observa- 
tion and  study  of  the  history  of  the  spiritual  life  of  man,  and  espe- 
cially to  religion,  we  will  not  conceive  of  the  development  of  religion 
as  a  simple,  straightforward  progress  in  reasonable  ideas,  but  as 
a  constant  interworking  of  universal  and  particular  ideas,  of  rational 
and  irrational  tendencies,  in  which  the  latter  by  no  means  act  simply 
as  hindrances  or  impedimenta,  but  also  serve  as  means  for  the 
deepening  of  the  religious  life,  and  furnish  the  impulse  to  new  and 
higher  progress.  This  view  enables  us  to  do  justice  to  the  facts 
of  religious  history  which  the  sceptic  Hume  pointed  out  so  ener- 
getically, and  at  the  same  time  to  hold  fast  to  the  optimistic  evolu- 
tionism which  has  been  the  soul  of  German  philosophy  since  Leib- 
nitz and  which  has  been  the  condition  and  ground  of  its  attitude 
towards  the  positive  ecclesiastical  forms  of  religion, — an  attitude 
which  has  been  one  of  freedom  and  at  the  same  time  of  a  discreet 
and  sober  conservatism  and  a  broad-minded,  wide-hearted  toler- 
ance. 


262 


II. 


That  religion  did  not  begin  in  monotheistic  faith  is  now  almost 
universally  acknowledged  by  religious  philosophers.  The  worship- 
ping cultus-community  was  at  first  circumscribed  by  the  narrow 
bounds  of  kinship  and  blood  relationship,  and  so  the  object  of  its 
worship  was  the  god  of  the  tribe,  who  possessed  only  limited  and 
locally  restricted  powers  and  found  his  rivals  in  the  gods  of  neighbor- 
ing tribes.  Polytheism  arose  through  the  union  and  combination 
of  various  tribes  into  larger  groups  and  peoples  with  a  well-organized 
civil  order.  The  earlier  tribal  gods  were  converted  into  the  mem- 
bers of  the  same  pantheon,  subordinated  to  one  supreme  god,  and 
set  up  as  the  rulers  of  the  separate  departments  of  nature  and  society. 
As  civilization  increased,  the  impulse  of  the  reason  toward  unifica- 
tion awakened,  and  strove  to  rise  in  one  way  or  another  above  the 
multiplicity  of  gods  to  a  unity.  This  was  accomplished  in  two 
principal  ways,  that  of  theoretical  reflection  and  that  of  the  practical 
ethically  induced  postulate.  The  more  the  understanding  intellect 
learns  to  observe  the  unitary  order  of  the  world,  the  less  it  is  satis- 
fied with  a  multiplicity  of  gods,  and  so  it  seeks  the  ground  of  this 
order  in  a  unitary  power  from  which  all  things  proceed,  or  of  a 
world-soul,  which  gives  life  to  all  and  is  manifest  in  all  things. 
The  One  in  all  now  becomes  for  him  the  only  true  God,  of  whom 
the  many  former  gods  are  different  manifestations,  corresponding 
to  the  various  natural  phenomena,  or  the  names  of  the  many  gods, 
to  whom  all  real  existence  is  now  denied,  become  so  many  worship- 
ful and  honorable  appellations  of  the  one  God.  Thus  we  read  in 
the  Vedas,  "They  have  called  him  Indra,  Mitra,  Varuna,  Agni, 
for  to  the  One  the  poets  give  many  names."  In  this  way  arose 
the  well-known  Pantheism  of  the  Brahmins,  the  Tao-doctrine  of 
the  Chinese,  the  esoteric  speculation  of  the  Egyptian  priests,  of 
the  orphic  theosophists,  and  of  the  Eleatic  philosophers  among  the 
Greeks.  But  it  is  significant  that  this  pantheistic  doctrine  of  the 
unity  of  God  was  restricted  everywhere  to  a  narrow  circle  of  the 
initiated,  such  as  philosophers  or  priests,  and  remained  without  any 
perceptible  influence  upon  the  actual  faith  of  the  people,  who  con- 
tinued the  worship  of  the  traditional  and  many  gods,  and  who,  when 
the  prestige  and  consideration  of  the  recognized  official  gods  de- 


263 

alined,  sought  substitutes  for  them  in  the  storehouse  of  the  oldest 
superstitions;  namely,  in  the  gods  of  the  mysteries,  of  which  we  will 
speak  later. 

The  other  way  out  of  polytheism  led  to  monotheism.  Here  it  was 
not  so  much  the  observation  and  reflection  upon  the  order  of  nature 
which  was  decisive,  but  rather  the  ethical  consciousness,  which 
called  for  a  just  government  of  human  affairs,  and  could  therefore 
believe  only  in  a  morally  good  ruler  of  the  world,  who  could  satisfy 
this  demand.  Attempts  in  this  direction  are  often  found  in  the 
polytheistic  religions,  in  which  the  monarchical  position  of  the 
supreme  god  is  so  strongly  emphasized  that  by  the  side  of  his  world- 
wide rule  the  other  gods  become  practically  unimportant.  Thus 
in  the  language  and  manner  of  speech  of  the  Greek  lyric  and  dram- 
atic poets  the  name  Zeus  is  used  almost  as  if  it  were  the  designation 
of  the  one  ruler  of  the  world,  so  that  some  upon  good  grounds  have 
ascribed  a  practical  monotheism  to  them.  The  Sun-god  Ra  fills 
a  similar  place  in  some  Egyptian  hymns. 

There  has  also  come  down  to  us  a  purely  monotheistic  hymn 
to  the  Sun-god  Amen,  the  god  of  the  heretical  king  Amenophis  IV. 
The  Chinese  heaven-god  and  high  emperor  of  fate,  Tien,  and  the 
Babylonian  Creator-god  Marduk  may  also  be  mentioned  here. 
The  nearest  approach  to  monotheism,  however,  was  made  by  the 
Ahuramazda-faith  of  the  Iranian  prophet  Zarathustra.  As  the 
will  of  the  good,  Ahura  is  raised  so  high  above  the  nature  gods  that 
he  becomes  the  one  and  only  Lord,  while  they  are  degraded  into 
his  servants  and  messengers.  To  be  sure,  his  rule  is  still  limited 
by  the  power  of  the  hostile  and  evil  spirit  Angromainyu,  but,  since 
this  resistance  is  to  be  conquered  in  the  end,  this  Persian  dualism 
is  by  no  means  absolute,  and  is  hardly  essentially  different  from 
the  Biblical  opposition  between  God  and  the  devil.  Of  course, 
we  may  take  it  for  granted  that  the  old  nature  gods,  who  were  de- 
graded to  the  rank  of  angels,  in  the  system  of  the  Avesta,  still  played 
an  important  r61e  as  independent  beings  in  the  popular  faith  of 
the  Persian  people,  otherwise  it  would  never  have  been  possible 
for  Mithraism  to  arise  to  such  great  importance  as  the  later  rival 
of  Christianity. 

Even  in  the  case  of  the  Israelites,  monotheism  was  no  more 
the  primitive  form  of  faith  than  in  the  case  of   any  other  people. 


264 

Jahve,  whom  the  tribes  held  in  common  as  their  national  God  after 
their  entrance  into  Canaan,  was  worshipped  side  by  side  with  the 
Canaanite  Baal  for  centuries.  As  long  as  the  being  of  Jahve 
(Jehovah)  was  not  specifically  conceived  to  be  different  and  higher 
than  that  of  the  nature  gods,  the  worship  of  Jahve  alone  could  not 
become  the  one  religion  exclusive  of  all  others.  The  prophets  of 
Israel  after  Elias  were  the  first  to  rise  to  this  conception.  Their 
quickened  moral  consciousness  and  ethical  insight  beheld  in  Jehovah, 
before  all  else,  the  holy  God,  who  willed  the  holiness  of  his  people, 
sat  in  judgment  upon  their  sins,  and  used  the  foreign  nations  as 
instruments  for  the  punishment  of  Israel's  trangressions. 

In  the  faith  of  the  prophets,  Jahve's  being  was  one  with  the  will  of 
the  good,  with  the  ethical  order  of  the  world,  and  thereby  he  was 
already  practically  the  one  God,  the  World  Ruler,  who  guides  the 
destinies  of  the  nations  and  uses  them  as  means  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  final  moral  aim  and  ethical  purpose.  We  must  not  forget, 
however,  that  in  the  pre-exilic  period,  at  least,  this  prophetical  faith 
was  very  far  from  being  the  faith  of  the  whole  people:  the  prophets 
themselves  are  constantly  complaining  that  their  preaching  met  with 
so  little  response,  and  that  the  majority  of  the  people  hardened  their 
hearts  against  their  message.  We  may  therefore  believe  that  the 
consciousness  of  the  multitude  had  not  yet  developed  to  that  degree 
of  intellectual  and  spiritual  maturity  which  would  have  been  necessary 
for  them  to  grasp  the  ethical  ideal  of  God  which  the  prophets  pro- 
claimed. The  faith  of  the  prophets  first  became  the  common  pos- 
session of  the  Jewish  people  in  the  post-exilic  community,  which  out 
of  the  general  shipwreck  of  their  national  existence  had  saved  their 
religion  only,  to  which  it  now  clung  with  greater  fidelity  than  ever 
before,  without  ever  again  relapsing  into  polytheistic  tendencies. 
With  this,  pure  monotheism  for  the  first  time  became  the  exclusive 
religion  of  a  people,  or  a  church-state.  However,  the  more  anxiously 
the  Jewish  people  separated  themselves  from  all  others  in  order  to 
maintain  the  purity  of  their  faith,  the  narrower  their  religion  grew. 

Although,  theoretically,  Jahve  was  still  thought  of  as  the  one  only 
God  and  Ruler  of  the  world,  nevertheless  for  the  religious  conscious- 
ness of  the  Jews  he  became  once  more  simply  the  particular  and 
special  God  of  their  nation,  to  whom  alone  he  had  revealed  his  will, 
whereas  he  maintained  no  positive  or  direct  relations  to  other  men. 


265 

"Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I  hated."  Of  course,  this 
Jewish  pretension  to  a  peculiar  possession  of  God  stands  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  universalism  of  the  monotheistic  idea  of  God,  and 
:me  might  easily  see  in  it  the  proof  of  a  colossal  national  pride,  but  we 
must  not  forget  that  precisely  this  Jewish  exclusiveness  proved  to  be 
the  inevitably  necessary  means  by  which  the  religion  of  the  prophets 
was  preserved  for  mankind.  The  more  the  later  Jewish  theological 
thought  separated  God  from  the  world  by  an  abysmal  gulf  and 
placed  him  at  an  infinite  and  inapproachable  distance,  the  more  men 
felt  the  need  of  bridging  this  gulf  by  means  of  more  accessible  medi- 
atory or  intercessory  beings  whom  it  was  easier  for  the  mind  to  con- 
template. For  this  the  Jews  found  the  acceptable  types  in  the  Persian 
religion.  The  Amshaspands  and  Yazatas,  who  formed  the  court 
of  Ahura,  found  their  counterpart  in  the  archangels  and  angels  who 
peopled  the  Jewish  heavens  and  served  as  managers  of  the  different 
departments  of  the  life  of  nature  and  humanity,  and  as  instruments  of 
God  in  his  government  of  the  world.  And  just  as  in  the  theology  of 
the  Avesta  the  spirit  of  Ahura,  as  well  as  his  good  thoughts  and  his 
icisdom,  were  personified  and  posited  as  independent  separate  beings, 
so  in  the  later  Jewish  speculation  the  Spirit,  the  Wisdom,  and  the 
Word  of  God  were  likewise  personified  and  posited  as  separate, 
self-existent,  and  creative  powers,  as  personal,  divine,  mediatorial 
beings.  This  process  was  carried  furthest  among  the  Alexandrian 
Jews,  who  were  acquainted  with  Egyptian  and  Greek  speculation, 
under  the  influence  of  which  the  Alexandrian  theologian  Philo 
plainly  distinguished  the  divine  Word  (Logos)  as  a  second  god  and 
first-born  son  of  God  from  God  himself,  and  described  this  Word  as 
the  mediator  of  the  divine  revelation  in  the  world,  in  the  history  of 
Israel,  and  in  the  hearts  of  the  pious.  There  can  be  no  question  that 
this  idea  is  a  mythical  invention  of  the  phantasy,  and  it  is  patent  that 
it  stands  in  contradiction  to  the  pure  thought  of  God  as  the  infinite, 
omnipresent,  and  all-energizing  spirit.  Shall  we,  like  Hume,  consider 
this  development  as  an  irrational  relapse  from  monotheism  to  poly- 
theism? Or  should  we  not  much  rather  see  in  this  reversion  the 
providential  means  whereby  God  in  his  divine  education  of  humanity 
prepared  for  the  transcending  of  the  one-sided  Jewish  monotheism 
and  the  introduction  of  a  deeper  and  richer  universal  religion  ?  The 
Jewish  monotheism  was  unquestionably  one-sided,  and  that  in  two 


266 

respects:  first,  inasmuch  as  the  one  only  God,  the  Lord  of  the  whole 
world,  was  conceived  as  standing  in  an  exclusive  relation  to  a  partic- 
ular people,  the  Jews;  and,  again,  in  so  far  as  He  is  thought  of  only  as 
the  transcendent,  supermundane  God,  standing  out  in  a  so  rugged, 
exclusive  opposition  and  contrast  to  the  world  that  this  visible  world 
of  nature  and  man  appeared  more  and  more  to  be  without  God  or  to 
be  even  hostile  to  God,  having  been  given  over  to  the  rule  of  the 
demons  and  being  destined  to  destruction  in  the  final  judgment. 
This  pessimistic  conception  of  the  world  and  of  human  life,  especially 
as  it  exists  in  the  later  Jewish  apocalypses,  was  due  in  part  to  the  evil 
conditions  of  the  times.  Nevertheless,  its  deepest  source  lay  in  this 
one-sided  transcendence  of  God,  in  this  dualistic  separation  of  God 
from  the  world  and  man,  which  made  any  real  inner  communion  of 
God  and  man  impossible,  and  left  room  only  for  the  cowering  fear 
of  the  slave  before  his  terrible  Judge  and  Lord. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  Jewish  speculation  concerning  divine 
mediatory  beings  no  longer  appears  to  us  as  a  meaningless  relapse 
into  heathen  superstition,  but  as  a  perfectly  justifiable  reaction  against 
the  one-sidedness  of  a  transcendental  dualistic  theism. 

By  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos,  Philo  and  his  successors  really  meant 
to  say  that  God  is  not  only  the  transcendent  and  supermundane- 
Lord  and  Judge  of  the  world,  but  that  he  is  everywhere  present  and 
everywhere  at  work  in  the  actual  world,  as  the  energizing  and  order- 
ing, the  inner ,  shaping  force  of  nature,  and  as  the  power  within  the 
intellectual,  moral,  and  religious  life  of  man.  This  basic  thought, 
which  can  easily  be  separated  from  the  original  mythical  form  of  the 
doctrine,  also  constitutes  its  essential  and  permanent  truth.  This 
development  of  Hellenic  Judaism  by  no  means  denied  the  mono- 
theistic faith  in  God,  but,  on  the  contrary,  simply  freed  it  from  its 
Jewish  narrowness  and  limitation,  and  broadened  and  deepened  it  by 
means  of  the  relative  truth  of  pagan  Pantheism,  which  may  be  ex- 
pressed in  two  utterances  of  Saint  Paul:  "For  God  is  not  only  a  God  of 
the  Jews,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles";  and  "  God  is  not  far  from  any  one 
of  us,  for  in  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being;  for  we  also 
are  his  offspring."  These  are  fundamental  truths  of  universal 
religion,  and  the  recognition  and  acceptance  of  these  truths  was  the 
essential  condition  without  which  Jewish  monotheism  could  never 
have  developed  into  a  world-religion. 


267 

But  at  the  very  time  that  Hellenic  Judaism  took  this  step  towards 
an  understanding  and  agreement  with  Greek  philosophy  and  the 
Greek  conception  of  the  world,  the  national  and  official  polytheistic 
religions  had  shared  in  the  decay  and  death  of  the  separate  national- 
ities composing  the  universal  empire  of  Rome,  and  in  consequence 
we  find  on  every  hand  new  religious  movements  and  attempts  at 
religious  reconstruction,  which  had  their  origin  in  popular  religious 
needs  and  feelings  and  grew  out  of  the  depths  of  the  human  soul. 
Mysterious  customs  and  doctrines,  strange  fantastic  mixtures  of 
the  oldest  ancestral  traditions  with  the  newest  wisdom  of  the  day, 
spring  up  everywhere.  To  the  superficial  observer  all  this  may  seem 
like  a  reversion  from  the  clear  intellectual  sanity  of  the  Graeco- 
Roman  civilization  and  culture  to  the  fantastical  mysticism  and 
asceticism  of  an  earlier  and  uncultured  time.  But,  if  we  observe 
more  closely,  a  strong  undercurrent  of  deep  religious  need,  aspira- 
tion and  intuition,  reveals  itself  beneath  all  that  is  strange  and  fan- 
tastical. "What  must  I  do  to  be  saved?"  This  question  strikes 
the  keynote  of  the  cultus  of  the  many  kinds  of  mysteries  of  the 
decadent  antique  world.  In  their  need,  men  did  not  turn  to  the 
highest  gods  of  the  national  religion,  but  to  the  inferior  gods,  who, 
according  to  old  popular  legends,  had  descended  into  hades,  and 
had  encountered  as  well  as  triumphantly  overcome  the  terrors  of 
death.  To  be  united  to  these  by  mysterious  vows  and  consecra- 
tions, to  make  men  partakers  of  their  divine  life  and  thereby  give 
them  the  assurance  of  happiness  and  bliss  in  the  beyond,  such  was 
the  aim  and  goal  of  all  the  mysteries;  and  the  purpose  which  was 
served  by  their  manifold  rites  and  ceremonies,  such  as  baths  of 
purification  and  castigations,  eating  sacramental  food,  speaking 
mystical  names  and  formulae,  and  contemplating  holy  symbols, — all 
of  these  were  used  as  means  to  excite  ecstatic  emotional  states, 
which  were  considered  as  the  demonstration  and  manifestation 
of  the  life  and  power  of  the  God  by  which  the  individual  was  pos- 
sessed and  by  which  he  was  transported  into  that  life  himself. 
Much  superstition  undoubtedly  mingled  with  all  this,  and  mystical 
enthusiasm  often  degenerated  into  immoral  and  orgiastic  practices, 
as  witness  the  Bacchantes  and  the  priests  of  Cybele  and  Isis.  Yet 
who  would  deny  that  there  is  manifest  in  these  phenomena  a  deep- 
ening of  religion,  which  had  now  become  the  personal  concern  of 


268 

the  individual,  as  well  as  the  desire  for  a  personal  inner  experience 
of  the  divine  life  and  for  the  elevation  of  the  spirit  above  the  com- 
mon reality  into  an  ideal  world  of  eternal  values?  The  deepest 
and  most  fundamental  religious  feelings  of  the  human  soul  have 
expressed  and  revealed  themselves  in  these  phenomena,  and  these 
feelings  have  universal  significance  and  importance,  although  they 
may  have  been  wrapped  in  and  buried  under  the  husks  of  tem- 
porary and  fantastical  ideas. 

Contemporaneous  with  the  deepening  of  the  inner  religious  life 
of  the  individual  by  the  mysteries  was  the  strengthening  and  hu- 
manizing of  the  ethical  consciousness  by  the  philosophy  of  the  Stoics. 
They  taught  that  a  man's  moral  worth  must  be  found  in  that 
inward  disposition  of  the  will  towards  the  good  which  is  indepen- 
dent of  nationality  or  social  position  or  the  outward  conditions  of 
his  life.  True  felicity  belongs  only  to  the  Wise  Man,  who  seeks 
happiness  not  in  outward  possessions,  but  in  the  purity  and  freedom 
of  his  soul  from  low  and  base  passions,  who  respects  the  worth 
and  dignity  of  human  personality  in  every  man,  and  who  feels  him- 
self united  to  all  men  through  brotherly  love  and  philanthropy,  as 
a  citizen  of  the  universal  state  of  God,  which  embraces  all  mankind. 
By  its  ethical  doctrine  of  motives  and  inward  disposition  and  by  its 
cosmopolitan  and  humanitarian  ideas  the  Stoical  philosophy  helped 
mightily  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  universal  religion,  but  it  could 
not  quite  reach  that  goal,  it  was  powerless  to  realize  the  universal 
religion,  because  as  a  rational  philosophy  it  lacked  the  religious 
enthusiasm  which  clothes  ideal  truths  in  concrete  forms  and  sym- 
bols, by  means  of  which  they  first  gain  real  power  over  the  feelings 
of  the  masses  of  men  and  can  become  the  faith  of  an  ecclesiastical 
community. 

Christianity  became  the  world-conquering  religion  because  it 
united  in  itself  the  most  powerful  religious  and  ethical  tendencies 
of  its  times  in  a  form  which,  although  paradoxical,  was  generally 
comprehensible,  and  which  gripped  the  hearts  of  men  as  well  as 
gave  the  intellect  food  for  thought.  It  took  over  from  Judaism 
its  monotheism,  but  stripped  it  of  its  national  limitations  and  cor- 
rected its  one-sided  transcendence  by  the  immanence  of  God  in 
man,  which  was  expressed  by  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  of 
the  son  of  God,  and  of  the  indwelling  of  the  spirit  of  God  in  the  con- 


269 

gregation, — in  short,  by  the  teaching  of  a  divine  humanity.  It 
took  over  the  pessimistic  apocalyptic  attitude  of  contempt  for  this 
world  and  the  hope  for  a  new  world,  but  modified  and  softened 
both  by  its  faith  in  the  present  existence  and  the  gradual  coming 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  congregation  of  the  faithful.  It  took 
over  from  the  mysteries  the  mythical  representation  of  a  suffering 
and  dying  God,  of  his  resurrection,  his  sacrificial  atonement,  and 
his  final  conquest  of  death,  but  for  the  mythical  heroes  of  the  mys- 
teries it  substituted  the  historical  person  of  the  sufferer  of  Golgotha, 
and  it  ethicized  their  orgiastic  enthusiasm  by  converting  it  into 
the  inspiration  of  faith  and  the  enthusiasm  of  the  love  which  reveals 
itself  through  sacrifice.  Like  the  Stoics,  it  treated  national  and 
social  distinctions  with  indifference,  but  to  the  negation  here  im- 
plied it  added  the  positive  duty  of  all  to  work  together  for  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Thus  Christianity  combined  the  various  religious 
and  ethical  ideas  and  tendencies  of  its  time  into  the  unity  of  a  new 
positive  religion,  and  it  was  precisely  this  creative,  unifying,  and 
elevating  synthesis  which  made  it  possible  for  Christianity  to  lay 
claim  to  an  unconditional  superiority  and  universality  as  against  the 
old  religions. 

But  does  this  claim  in  its  full  and  strict  sense  still  hold  good  for 
us?  Is  this  positive  religion,  with  all  its  accidental  historical,  its 
mythical,  apocalyptic,  and  ascetic  elements,  the  absolute,  universal 
religion,  valid  for  all  men  and  for  all  time  ?  To  answer  this  ques- 
tion in  the  affirmative  is  becoming  more  and  more  impossible  in 
these  critical  times.  We  are  no  longer  naive  enough  to  overlook 
the  contrast  of  all  those  historical  antique  elements  to  our  modern 
habits  of  thought  in  the  naive  way  which  has  been  the  custom 
in  the  past.  Shall  we,  then,  simply  strike  out  those  parts  of  positive 
Christianity  which  are  no  longer  acceptable  to  us,  after  the  manner 
of  the  rationalism  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  century,  and  de- 
clare the  remainder  to  be  true  Christianity?  I  believe  our  keener 
historical  conscience  would  forbid  that,  nor  can  we  be  blind  to  the 
fact  that  this  radical  operation  throws  overboard  just  those  very 
elements  which  give  to  Christianity  its  distinctive  character  as  well 
as  the  depth  and  richness  of  its  religious  ideas  and  its  capacity  to 
satisfy  the  most  varied  religious  needs.  Or  shall  we  follow  the  pro- 
gramme of  modern  rationalism,  and  declare  Christianity  to  be  wholly 


270 

antiquated,  and  then  proceed  to  evolve  out  of  our  own  conscious- 
ness the  new  religion  of  the  future,  which  is  to  take  its  place? 
Here,  again,  we  would  find  no  thoroughfare.  Such  a  course  would 
be  forbidden  not  only  by  our  pious  regard  and  feeling  towards  the 
religion  of  our  fathers,  but  also  by  our  historical  insight  into  the 
fact  that  religions  cannot  be  constructed  or  made  to  order  in  this 
fashion,  like  a  system  of  philosophy,  because  religion  is  life,  and  only 
life  can  beget  life,  and  new  life  can  only  spring  and  grow  out  of 
pre-existing  life. 

What,  then,  can  we  do  ?  What  course  remains  open  to  us?  What 
action  is  possible  and  best  ? 

Our  German  philosophy  has  given  the  answer  to  this  question  long 
ago.  It  has  shown,  as  we  saw  in  the  beginning,  that  universal  religion, 
understood  in  the  strict  sense  as  the  whole  truth  in  its  purity,  is  an 
Ideal,  and  as  such  cannot  and  should  not  suddenly  or  immediately 
take  the  place  of  positive  religion,  but  this  Ideal  has  always  con- 
trolled and  guided  the  development  of  the  positive  religions  as  its 
living  and  regulative  principle,  and  should  and  always  will  continue  to 
do  so.  As  Christianity  in  its  origin  was  itself  the  fruit  of  the  religious 
evolution  preceding  it,  and  the  synthesis  of  its  elements  of  relative 
truth,  so  in  its  own  history  it  has  passed  through  manifold  develop- 
ments, in  the  course  of  which  it  has  adapted  itself  anew  to  different 
peoples,  to  different  habits  of  mind  and  thought,  and  to  different 
periods  of  time;  it  has  transformed  the  old  and  appropriated  much  that 
was  new;  it  has  overcome  morbid  states  and  conditions  of  spiritual 
paralysis  by  the  inexhaustible  vitality  of  its  spiritual  power;  and  the 
churches  of  the  Reformation  at  least  have  always  acknowledged  and 
recognized  the  constant  purification  and  renewal  of  ecclesiastical 
forms  through  the  spirit  of  truth  as  the  task  of  every  generation. 

They  who  have  become  clearly  conscious  of  the  difference  between 
the  traditional  and  positive  form  and  the  ideal  truth  of  Chris- 
tianity are  called,  before  all  others,  to  contribute  their  honest  and 
patient  labor  towards  the  solution  of  this  problem.  But  they  will 
accomplish  this  task  all  the  better,  the  more  they  are  impressed  with 
the  thought,  which  has  even  greater  validity  in  the  domain  of  religion 
than  in  any  other,  that  it  is  not  revolution,  but  evolution,  which  leads 
to  the  happy  solution  of  all  difficulties.  This  maxim  should  determine 
our  whole  attitude  towards  and  our  treatment  of  religious  problems 


271 

in  public  or  in  private.  Not  destruction,  but  construction,  is  our 
task.  We  are  here  not  to  tear  down,  but  to  build  up.  We  must  not 
oppose  our  own  dogmas  to  those  of  others  with  the  same  pretension 
to  infallibility  and  exclusive  validity,  for  thereby  the  strife  of  con- 
troversy would  simply  be  everywhere  embittered  and  perpetuated. 
But  we  wish  to  tolerate  every  sincere  religious  conviction,  providing 
it  does  not  work  positive  harm,  and  we  will  try  to  understand  its 
psychological  motives  and  their  relative  truth,  to  seize  upon  these  as 
the  essentials,  and  to  strip  off  the  error  which  cleaves  to  them  with 
gentleness  and  consideration,  hoping  that  then  in  the  course  of  time 
it  will  disappear  of  its  own  accord.  Those  who  have  fallen  out  so 
completely  with  the  faith  of  the  churches  that  they  are  in  danger  of 
losing  all  religion  whatever  we  will  try  to  lead  to  the  understanding 
that  the  things  which  are  an  offence  and  a  stumbling-block  to  them 
are  in  reality  only  the  temporary  and  perishable  shells  which  contain 
the  precious  pearls  of  eternal  truth  for  him  who  looks  not  upon  the 
visible,  but  upon  that  which  is  invisible  and  eternal.  If  we  thus 
speak  the  truth  in  love,  we  shall  not  increase  strife,  but  will  prepare 
the  way  for  a  peaceful  and  wholesome  solution  of  the  present  crisis  of 
Christianity, — a  solution  which  will  continue  and  complete  the  un- 
finished work  of  the  Reformation  in  such  a  way  that  the  now  hostile 
confessions,  sects,  and  parties  will  finally  acknowledge,  respect,  and 
esteem  each  other  as  brothers  in  the  one  house  of  their  common 
Father.  Fixing  our  gaze  upon  this  high  aim,  let  us  continue  to  work, 
with  fidelity  and  patience,  upon  the  great  task  which  has  been  set 
before  us,  always  keeping  well  in  mind  the  motto,  "Nicht  mitzu- 
hassen,  mitzulieben  bin  ich  da," — "I  am  here  not  to  hate  with 
those  who  hate,  but  to  love  with  those  who  love." 


272 

The  Chairman. — The  next  and  closing  part  on  the  program  will 
be  an  illustrated  description  of  Harvard  University.  It  will  take  a 
moment  or  two  to  let  down  the  curtain  on  which  the  illustrations 
will  appear.  During  that  time  it  occurs  to  me  that  the  audience 
may  desire  to  stand  for  a  minute.  But  you  will  not  be  relieved  from 
voices  on  the  platform,  for  our  Secretary,  Mr.  Wendte,  desires  to 
make  two  brief  announcements. 

The  Secretary. — We  were  fortunate  in  securing  yesterday  an 
excellent  photograph  of  the  foreign  delegates,  but  we  did  not  succeed 
in  obtaining  the  photograph  which  we  desired  of  the  entire  Con- 
gress. Therefore,  as  we  leave  the  theatre,  we  will  assemble  on  the 
steps  and  be  taken  in  one  great  group  photograph,  of  which  copies 
can  be  obtained  at  headquarters.  Secondly,  with  regard  to  the  pro- 
ceedings and  papers  of  the  Congress,  I  will  announce  that  the  Chris- 
tian Register  of  this  and  two  successive  weeks  will  contain  very  full 
reports,  the  Register  this  week  publishing  forty-eight  pages  for  that 
purpose.  The  volume  which  will  contain  the  papers  and  proceed- 
ings of  this  Congress,  together  with  photographs  of  the  principal 
delegates  and  speakers,  will  be  published  in  December,  and  subscrip- 
tions are  in  order  at  any  time. 

Professor  Peabody  will  now  give  an  illustrated  description  of 
Harvard  University.    It  will  occupy  fifteen  minutes. 

Professor  Francis  G.  Peabody,  D.D.,  then  gave  a  brief  historical 
sketch  of  Harvard  College,  with  the  description  of  the  buildings, 
showing  pictures  of  the  prominent  buildings,  also  a  copy  of  the  char- 
ter of  the  college. 


«73 


ADDRESSES  MADE  AT  THE  NATIONAL  CONFER- 
ENCE OF  UNITARIAN  AND  OTHER  CHRISTIAN 
CHURCHES,  IN  TREMONT  TEMPLE,  MONDAY, 
SEPTEMBER   23,  1907. 

The  National  Unitarian  Conference,  which  united  with  the  Ameri- 
can Unitarian  Association  in  inviting  the  International  Council  to 
hold  its  fourth  session  in  Boston,  in  order  to  give  the  largest  oppor- 
tunity for  the  international  meetings,  not  only  abbreviated  its  own 
customary  biennial  session  this  autumn  to  a  single  day,  but  in  its 
selection  of  speakers  and  the  topics  they  were  to  treat  was  governed 
by  an  expressed  desire  of  their  guests  from  abroad  to  acquaint  them- 
selves more  fully  with  the  principles,  ideals,  and  working  methods  of 
American  church  life,  and  especially  with  those  of  the  liberal  de- 
nominations of  the  United  States. 

It  has  seemed  advisable  under  these  circumstances  to  include  in 
this  volume  several  papers  read  before  the  National  Unitarian  Con- 
ference, but  possessing  permanent  interest  and  value  for  the  mem- 
bers of  the  International  Congress. 


274 


THE   NEW   COMITY  OF   NATIONS. 

BY   HON.    CARROLL   D.    WRIGHT,    LL.D.,    PRESIDENT    CLARK    COLLEGE, 

WORCESTER,   PRESIDENT  OF   THE  NATIONAL  UNITARIAN 

CONFERENCE. 

Two  years  ago  this  Conference  voted  that  this  year  one  day  only 
should  be  given  to  its  own  work,  and  that  the  rest  of  the  time  of  the 
week  should  be  given  up  to  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian 
and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers.  This  was  a 
deserved  courtesy  to  the  delegates  who  are  gathering  this  week  from 
all  parts  of  the  world.  It  is  therefore  eminently  fitting  that  the  sub- 
jects to  be  considered  on  this  one  day  should  take  a  broader  and 
wider  field  than  when  simply  the  wants  and  the  interests  of  our 
own  country  are  to  be  considered. 

This  International  Council  is  an  important  step  or  element  in  the 
great  undertakings  that  are  continually  going  on  for  broadening  the 
outlook  of  nations.  These  undertakings  are  bringing  about  a  new 
comity  of  nations.  They  are  teaching  us  what  may  be  called  the  true 
intercourse  of  different  races,  of  different  nationalities,  under  which 
new  forms  of  procedure  are  being  projected,  and  this  great  inter- 
national effort  will  grow  and  expand  as  intelligence  increases  and 
religion  finds  practical  fields  for  work.  For,  unless  the  new  comity 
of  nations  is  based  upon  high  religious  principles,  these  efforts  will 
either  fail  or  in  a  measure  disappoint  those  who  are  fostering 
them. 

I  do  not  think  it  is  too  courageous  to  assert  that  all  these  great 
movements  are  based  upon  that  practical  religion  which  in  our  time 
we  find  supreme  in  the  government  of  all  our  forces. 

The  great  watchword  is  the  fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brother- 
hood of  man,  and  the  principle  of  this  watchword  should  be,  and  I 
believe  is,  the  corner-stone  of  all  the  great  efforts  of  which  we  know 
and  read. 


275 

If  this  foreword  be  true  and  indicative  of  real  conditions,  then  this 
Conference  of  ours  is  taking  a  part  of  which  it  in  the  future  will  be 
proud,  and  which  in  the  present  means  assistance,  sympathy,  and 
influence  for  all  the  others. 

We  welcome  here  to-day  not  alone  the  delegates  who  constitute 
the  Conference,  chosen  from  our  various  churches  all  over  our  land, 
but  we  welcome  the  delegates  from  other  nations  who  come  from 
afar  to  join  with  us  in  our  acts  and  in  our  deliberations.  We  wel- 
come the  men  from  far  Hungary,  from  England,  from  Holland,  from 
Switzerland,  from  Germany,  from  France,  and  from  the  Far  East, — 
a  goodly  company  bent  on  presenting  the  highest  ideals  of  their 
constituents  and  of  bringing  to  America  the  news  of  their  progress 
and  of  their  efforts.  And  we  welcome,  too,  those  members  of  dif- 
ferent communions,  Jew  and  Gentile,  who  are  bearers  of  the  word 
of  God;  educators,  whose  hearts  and  minds  are  devoted  to  the  high- 
est work;  business  men,  who  are  willing  to  lay  aside  the  affairs  of 
the  day  and  join  us  in  reorganizing  the  very  highest  religious  ideals. 
They  make  a  council  of  wise  thinkers  and  workers,  free  from  dog- 
matic theological  tenets,  free  to  stand  before  the  public  as  repre- 
senting the  necessity  of  applying  the  highest  religious  ideals  to  the 
affairs  of  the  world. 

Our  deliberations,  therefore,  take  on  the  character  of  a  conference 
devoted  to  the  very  best  interests  of  humanity. 

What  are  the  great  movements  to  which  I  have  alluded?  They 
are  great  and  ever-present  and  ever-increasing  elements  which  are 
bringing  about  the  brotherhood  of  man  and  the  fatherhood  of  God, 
the  chief  elements  in  international  intercourse  and  international 
righteousness. 

We  have  in  the  world  now  a  new  diplomacy, — a  diplomacy  based 
on  truth,  sincerity,  and  the  welfare  of  contracting  nations,  not  the 
old  diplomacy  based  on  duplicity,  chicanery,  and  an  effort  to  secure 
the  highest  means  of  international  selfishness.  Great  nations, 
sovereigns,  peoples,  now  recognize  the  necessity  of  honest  dealings 
with  each  other, — dealings  that  shall  represent  the  interest  of  hu- 
manity and  not  narrow  sectional  politics.  Our  own  John  Hay  put 
his  religion  into  the  initiatory  steps  which  led  to  the  adoption  of  this 
new  diplomacy.  Everywhere  now  an  ambassador  must  be  not  only 
a  representative  of  the  government  whose  commission  he  bears,  but 


276 

a  representative  of  the  highest  ethics  under  which  he  may  deal  with 
the  government  to  which  he  is  accredited.  This  new  diplomacy 
means  much  for  the  welfare  of  the  peoples  of  the  earth. 

And  in  education  the  same  movement  is  going  on.  The  teachers, 
the  scholars  of  the  great  universities  of  different  countries,  are  ex- 
changing not  only  their  services,  but  their  thoughts,  the  representa- 
tive of  one  country  giving  to  the  people  of  the  other  the  best  thought 
which  can  be  carried. 

What  stimulates  such  a  movement  as  this,  broad,  comprehensive, 
and  grand  as  it  is?  Could  it  have  been  done  under  the  old  comity 
of  nations,  which  simply  sought  selfish  ends  and  not  broad  human- 
itarian results  ? 

Education  and  religion  are  so  closely  allied  that  we  cannot  sepa- 
rate them,  and  in  this  new  movement,  which  will  extend  as  time 
goes  on,  we  see  the  motive  of  the  man  who  originated  it,  primarily 
for  an  exchange  of  scholarship;  but  really  it  is  an  element  in  the 
extension  of  the  truest  religious  principles. 

And  we  have  had  great  delegations,  hundreds  of  teachers  coming 
from  Great  Britain  to  the  United  States  to  study  our  ways,  our 
methods,  and  their  results.  Shall  we  not  reciprocate  and  send  our 
delegations  to  different  countries  to  study  their  methods  and  the 
results  thereof  ?  Individually,  this  has  been  going  on  for  years.  The 
exchange  of  students,  the  exchange  of  thought  and  ideas,  the  famil- 
iarization of  methods  and  processes  which  to  one  or  the  other  seems 
strange,  is  doing  much  to  place  education  on  a  universal  basis  and 
relieve  it  of  local  conditions. 

And  now  the  great  peace  movements  are  bringing  the  peoples  of 
the  world  nearer  together.  The  grand  spectacle  of  forty-five  nations 
represented  at  The  Hague  at  the  recent  Peace  Conference  stimu- 
lates each  man  who  reads  of  their  doings,  who  reads  of  their  discus- 
sions, who  understands  their  methods,  to  feel  that  he  is  something 
more  than  a  citizen  of  his  particular  locality.  He  feels  that  he  is  a 
part  of  the  movement  which  shall  bring  about  a  cessation  of  war, 
and  bring  in  a  movement  for  the  settlement  of  great  international 
difficulties  on  a  basis  of  justice,  of  reason  and  enlightenment. 
The  gathering  here  of  the  delegates  to  the  Council  as  the  guests 
of  America  stimulates  such  a  movement,  and  adds  to  it  power  and 
influence. 


REV.  W.  COPELAND  BOWIE 
London,  England 


PRINCIPAL  J.  ESTLIN  CARPENTER,  DJ). 
Oxford,  England 


MR.  FRED  MADDISON,  M.P. 
England 


SIR  WILLTAM  B.  BO  WRING,  Bart. 
Liverpool,  England 


277 

The  increasing  interest  in  investigations  by  governments  is  hardly 
appreciated.  Not  a  year,  perhaps  not  a  month,  goes  by  that  there 
are  not  government  agents — experts  in  their  various  lines — looking 
into  sociological  conditions  in  various  countries,  whereby  they  may 
benefit  by  the  experience  of  those  who  have  undertaken  practically 
to  carry  out  some  great  reform  in  the  interests  of  the  people  at  large. 

Our  own  government  is  not  behindhand  in  this  matter.  These 
experts  investigate  and  report  upon  the  labor  conditions,  economic 
relations  of  government  and  people,  the  relations  of  employer 
and  employee,  child  labor,  the  employment  of  women,  and  all 
the  great  elements  of  the  great  question  which  we  label  labor. 
How  capitalists  deal  with  affairs,  how  capitalists  deal  with 
employees,  how  employees  conduct  themselves,  the  conditions 
under  great  combinations  of  capital  and  great  combinations  of 
labor, — all  these  things  are  the  subject  of  grave  inquiry  and 
honest  candid  report. 

We  learn  what  is  being  done  in  other  countries,  other  countries 
learn  what  is  being  done  here,  and  we  profit  by  the  example.  And 
this  example  is  a  distinct  recognition  of  great  underlying  religious 
principles,  which  are  rapidly  teaching  the  world  that  the  solution  of 
the  labor  problem  is  religious  in  its  nature,  and  that  there  can  be  no 
solution  unless  these  principles  are  recognized  and  put  into  practical 
effect. 

These  investigations  cover  that  complicated  and  difficult  problem 
of  immigration.  Our  government  agents  are  constantly  studying 
conditions  abroad  with  a  view  of  making  immigration  a  force  in 
society.  The  treatment  of  immigrants,  the  efforts  to  utilize  their 
services  by  sane  methods, — all  these  things  bespeak  a  higher  plane 
of  civilization  for  many,  many  people. 

The  International  Prison  Association  is  a  body  of  philanthropists 
of  practical  experience  in  dealing  with  the  delinquents  of  society, 
which  is  doing  God's  service.  The  welfare  of  what  we  were  wont  to 
call  the  outcasts  of  society  has  been  improved,  all  previous  condi- 
tions bettered,  and  the  moral  tone  of  everything  relating  to  criminology 
and  penology  brought  to  a  higher  plane, — truly  practical  interna- 
tional religion  of  the  loftiest  type. 

But  there  is  one  very  important  question  which  ought  to  be  con- 
sidered by  this  Conference  and  by  the  International  Council, — a 


278 

question  on  which  this  country  can  throw  some  light.  We  are  not 
troubled  here  by  the  question  of  the  relation  of  State  and  Church. 
England,  France,  Germany,  Austria,  nearly  all  advanced  nations, 
are  considering  this  grave  question.  The  delegates  from  countries 
where  this  trouble  exists,  whether  in  an  acute  or  other  condition,  can 
learn  much  from  us.  We  can  learn  many,  many  things  from  them; 
but  on  this  one  point  we  have  an  experience  here  that  can  only  be 
beneficial  to  all. 

We  believe  in  the  separation  of  State  from  Church.  We  believe  in 
the  voluntary  support  of  religion.  We  believe  that  such  voluntary 
support  makes  for  the  very  highest  elements  of  religious  work.  You 
may  marvel,  some  of  you  who  are  here  as  our  guests  from  far-away 
countries,  that  the  Church  can  survive  without  State  aid.  The 
facts  here  will  show  that  religious  faith,  theology,  can  grow  most 
naturally  and  effectively  in  an  atmosphere  of  freedom;  but  this  is 
not  all  the  facts  will  show  to  indicate  how  generously  churches  and 
all  institutions  of  religion  can  be  maintained  by  exclusively  voluntary 
contributions.  And,  again,  it  is  seen  and  testified  to  on  all  hands 
with  us  that  the  habit  of  voluntary  maintenance  has  had  its  own 
influence  upon  the  morale  of  our  religion  and  its  virility. 

You  may  ask,  Does  not  the  State  in  some  way  aid  the  church? 
and  the  answer  must  be  yes.  All  over  our  land  church  property  is 
exempt  from  taxation,  and,  so  far  as  the  value  of  the  church  property 
of  the  country  is  concerned,  the  public  treasury  loses  what  it  would 
secure,  were  such  property  taxed.  The  value  of  the  exempt  church 
property  in  the  United  States  is  roughly  estimated  at  $3,500,000,000. 
With  the  average  rate  of  taxation  this  would  bring  into  the  various 
State  treasuries  about  $56,000,000.  These  estimates  are  far  under 
the  truth. 

This  is  the  aid  the  State  gives  to  the  churches;  but  it  extends  the 
same  aid,  or  aid  in  the  same  way,  to  all  charitable  and  educational 
institutions.  It  is  the  theory  of  the  State  that  it  should  encourage  all 
charitable  and  religious  institutions,  not  by  gifts,  but  by  exemption 
from  taxation.  In  our  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  alone  the 
value  of  church  property  exempt  from  taxation  is  estimated  at  over 
$64,000,000,  resulting  in  an  indirect  aid  to  churches  of  over  $1,000,000 
annually.  But,  so  far  as  the  general  support  and  maintenance  of 
religious  institutions  are  concerned,  the  voluntary  habit  prevails, 


279 

while  the  State  has  no  interest  whatever  in  the  government  or  direc- 
tion of  church  business  or  church  work. 

In  the  beginning  here  with  us  in  the  Eastern  States  the  parish  was 
the  political  town,  and  afterward  the  parish  became  the  town  through 
incorporation  by  the  State,  and  the  separation  has  been  complete 
since  those  days.  Nor  would  the  people  of  the  country  change  this 
condition  to  in  any  way  partake  of  the  elements  of  the  relation  of 
State  and  Church,  as  it  is  found  in  other  countries. 

The  changes  in  the  principles  of  missionary  work  are  changes 
which  mean  more  than  their  recital  indicates.  We  are  beginning 
to  see  everywhere,  through  our  missionary  efforts,  that  duplication 
in  one  locality  means  weakness.  We  are  beginning  to  see,  further- 
more, that  the  best  way  to  aid  missionary  work  is  through  the  de- 
velopment and  character  of  the  moral  lives  of  those  for  whom  the 
efforts  are  undertaken.  No  longer  does  dogmatic  theology  prevail 
in  these  efforts,  but  instead  we  have  that  deep,  underlying  religion 
which  means  the  uplifting  of  people  in  a  lowly  state. 

All  these  movements,  and  others  of  which  I  have  made  no  men- 
tion, are,  as  I  have  said,  religious  in  their  nature,  and  they  would 
seem  to  indicate  that  the  time  is  coming  when  we  shall  have  what 
somebody  has  called  a  universal  patriotism.  This,  however,  it 
seems  to  me  is  neither  possible  nor  desirable,  in  fact  it  is  illogical. 

A  man  may  have  filial  affection  and  he  may  have  sympathy  with 
all  mankind,  but  he  cannot  apply  his  filial  affection  to  mankind.  A 
man  can  be  a  patriotic  Briton  or  Austrian,  but  he  cannot  at  the 
same  time  be  a  patriotic  Frenchman  or  American.  He  may  elevate 
his  patriotism  to  the  point  of  sympathy  with  his  brothers  of  other 
nations,  but  without  a  national  patriotism  the  world's  progress  would 
recede.  But  that  patriotism  which  embraces  all  his  brothers  of  the 
same  household  may  temper  all  the  questions  of  nations,  so  that  we 
shall  have  a  patriotism  broader  than  locality  develops,  kinder  and 
more  generous,  less  selfish,  and  of  a  character  which  means  what  I 
have  called  the  new  Comity  of  Nations.  And  this  will  lead  all  our 
efforts  to  the  securing  of  an  international  conscience,  a  conscience 
which  shall  govern  the  leaders  and  the  administrators  of  all  progres- 
sive nations  in  their  conduct  with  each  other,  a  conscience  which 
shall  recognize  honesty,  truth,  sincerity,  as  the  leading  elements  of 
international  relations,  and  which  will  in  time  do  away  with  many 


28o 

T>f  the  hardships  that  come  now  wherever  the  old  diplomacy  and  the 
old  form  of  comity  exists. 

This  new  form,  or  this  new  international  conscience,  will  establish 
on  earth  a  general  and  firm  belief  that  God  is  the  father  of  us  all, 
and  that  we  are  brothers  under  the  same  divine  administration. 
Nations  will  grow  under  this,  they  will  prosper,  and  they  will  be  the 
true  examples  of  the  highest  civilization  and  of  international  right- 
eousness. 


28l 


THE   FREEDOM    OF  CHURCHES    IN  THE  UNITED 

STATES  AS  REGARDS   PROPERTY-HOLDING 

AND   SELF-GOVERNMENT. 

BY  PRESIDENT  C.  W.  ELIOT,    OF  HARVARD   UNIVERSITY. 

The  first  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  an 
amendment  proposed  by  the  first  Congress  in  1789-90,  provides 
that  Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  the  establishment  of  a 
religion  or — a  very  different  thing — prohibiting  the  free  exercise 
thereof;  and  among  the  powers  which  the  Constitution  itself  specifi- 
cally gave  to  the  national  government  there  is  no  power  to  acquire, 
maintain,  or  regulate  churches  or  other  religious  organizations.  In 
Section  10  of  the  Constitution,  which  declares  what  States  shall  not 
do,  there  is  no  reference  whatever  to  churches  or  the  holding  of 
church  property,  so  that  the  several  States  are  left  free  to  determine 
how  church  property  shall  be  held,  protected,  and  transferred.  The 
several  States  have  therefore  determined  how  church  property  is 
to  be  held,  chiefly  by  enacting  statutes,  which  have  been  revised 
from  time  to  time,  as  occasion  arose,  to  meet  new  needs  or  new 
conditions.  Although  several  of  the  original  provinces  had,  at 
some  stage  of  their  history,  before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  maintained  established  churches, — as,  for 
instance,  the  Congregational  Church  in  Massachusetts  and  the 
Church  of  England  in  Virginia, — not  a  single  State  has  ever  main- 
tained a  religious  establishment,  while  all  the  States  have  provided 
by  statute  for  the  holding  of  real  and  personal  property  for  religious 
uses  by  corporations,  trustees,  and  various  voluntary  associations. 

The  American  States  have  had  no  direct  experience  of  the  possible 
evils  of  permanent  foundation  or  endowments,  and  therefore  have 
felt  no  serious  distrust  of  them.  Since  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  was  adopted,  none  of  the  States  has  had  experience  of  a  domi- 
nant and  oppressive  church.  No  State  has  had  occasion  to  take  any 
action  at  all  resembling  that  of  the  English  government  when,  for 


282 

political  reasons,  it  took  away  the  property  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  in  England  and  bestowed  it  on  a  new  creation  of  its  own, — 
the  Anglican  Church.  In  short,  all  the  conditions  have  been  favor- 
able to  the  legal  establishment  of  a  large  freedom  for  churches. 

One  of  the  leading  considerations  determining  the  poh'cy  of  the 
several  States  toward  religion  has  been  the  existence  within  every 
State  of  a  great  variety  of  religious  denominations,  all  of  which  were 
voluntary  associations,  but  which  differed  among  themselves  as  to 
the  particular  manner  in  which  they  wished  severally  to  hold  their 
properties.  Accordingly,  we  often  find  separate  statutes  concerning 
the  property  of  the  separate  denominations,  such  as  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  the  Roman  Catholic  and  Greek  Churches,  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  the  Quakers,  the  Presbyterians,  the 
Dutch  Reformed,  Lutheran,  and  Baptist  Churches,  and  the  inde- 
pendent local  churches  which  are  not  affiliated  with  any  similar 
churches  elsewhere.  The  variety  of  Christian  denominations  and 
the  absence  of  a  church  of  the  majority  have  been  real  safeguards 
of  religious  liberty  in  the  United  States.  As  a  rule,  the  political  influ- 
ence of  any  one  church  is  not  dreaded  in  the  United  States,  in  spite 
of  the  fact  that  there  have  been  occasional  outbursts  of  no-popery 
fury  in  some  of  the  Protestant  populations.  These  infrequent  out- 
bursts have  been  quite  as  much  racial  as  religious,  and  have  quickly 
been  recognized  as  temporary  and  unreasonable  panics. 

The  States  have  all  given  large  rights  and  powers  to  voluntary 
associations  for  religious  purposes  in  great  variety,  because  they 
have  distinctly  recognized  that  the  churches  as  a  whole  contribute 
to  the  welfare  and  efficiency  of  the  people,  and  therefore  to  the 
success  and  stability  of  democratic  government.  They  have  believed 
that  the  primary  sources  of  the  ills  and  wrongs  which  society  has 
long  endured,  and  still  endures,  are  ignorance  and  lack  of  opportu- 
nities and  means  to  acquire  salutary  knowledge;  and  they  have 
regarded  churches  and  schools  as  the  best  constructive  agencies  for 
deliverance  from  these  long-endured  evils. 

The  States,  with  unimportant  exceptions,  have  also  fostered 
churches  of  all  kinds  by  exempting  their  property  from  taxation, 
just  as  they  have  exempted  educational  and  charitable  foundations 
from  taxation  on  the  ground  that  such  institutions  are  rendering  a 
public  service  by  means  of  endowments  derived  from  benevolent 


283 

private  persons.  Declining  to  own  and  maintain  churches  itself, 
the  State  has  given  all  possible  assistance  to  every  group  of  people 
that  will  voluntarily  undertake  to  build  and  maintain  a  church. 

An  element  in  the  great  problem  of  a  free  church  in  a  free  State, 
which  complicates  the  religious  situation  in  European  countries,  is 
wholly  lacking  in  the  United  States.  There  are  no  ecclesiastical 
edifices  here  which  could  possibly  be  considered  monuments  to  be 
owned  and  maintained  by  the  nation  or  by  a  State.  The  public 
monuments  owned  and  maintained  by  the  national,  State,  or  munic- 
ipal governments  in  the  United  States  are  capitols,  court-houses, 
universities,  school-houses,  custom-houses,  and  city  halls,  but  never 
churches.  The  cathedrals  and  other  monumental  churches  of 
Europe  have  no  parallel  in  the  United  States.  And  if,  in  the  future, 
such  structures  shall  be  built  here,  they  will  be  clearly  the  property 
of  religious  corporations  which  have  been  created,  protected,  and 
fostered  under  State  statutes. 

The  desire  of  the  State  to  promote  religious  associations  for  relig- 
ious purposes  appears  strongly  in  the  Statutes  of  the  State  of  Maine 
(5th  revision,  1903,  chapter  xvi.,  sections  1  and  2),  which  provide 
that  any  persons  of  lawful  age  may,  by  applying  to  a  justice  of  the 
peace  and  getting  a  warrant  for  a  meeting,  meet  and  choose  a  clerk 
and  other  needful  parish  officers,  and  shall  thereupon  be  a  corpora- 
tion, bear  the  name  which  they  assume,  and  have  all  the  powers  of 
parishes  and  religious  societies.  The  extraordinary  freedom  to  form 
societies  for  religious  purposes  and  the  distinction  between  a  church 
and  a  religious  society  are  brought  out  clearly  and  authoritatively 
in  the  case  of  Silsbee  v.  Barlow  et  al.  (i860)  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Massachusetts,  as  follows: — 

"A  church  is  understood,  among  those  whose  polity  is  congrega- 
tional or  independent,  to  be  a  body  of  persons  associated  together 
for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  Christian  worship  and  ordinances. 
A  religious  society  is  a  body  of  persons  associated  together  for  the 
purpose  of  maintaining  religious  worship  only,  omitting  the  sacra- 
ments. A  church  and  society  are  often  united  in  maintaining  wor- 
ship; and  in  such  cases  the  society  commonly  owns  the  property, 
and  makes  the  pecuniary  contract  with  the  minister.  But  in  many 
instances  societies  exist  without  a  church  and  churches  without  a 
society.    Churches  are  not  corporate  bodies,  and  commonly  have 


284 

no  occasion  for  the  exercise  of  corporate  power.  By  our  statutes 
their  officers  have  sufficient  corporate  powers  to  enable  them  to  hold 
any  property  that  may  be  given  to  their  church.  Originally,  all  our 
religious  societies  were  corporate  bodies.  The  towns  at  first  exer- 
cised parochial  powers,  most  of  the  people  of  this  State  being  of  one 
denomination.  But,  as  varieties  of  opinion  sprung  up,  it  became 
necessary  to  separate  the  parochial  from  the  municipal  business,  and 
the  parishes  formed  separate  organizations.  Other  religious  societies 
were  incorporated  by  special  acts;  but  many  congregations  remained 
unincorporated.  Some  persons  had  conscientious  scruples  against 
corporations,  and  others  preferred  to  manage  their  religious  affairs 
in  a  different  way.  The  statute  of  1811,  chapter  vi.,  section  3,  was 
enacted  for  the  benefit  of  such  persons.  It  enabled  unincorporated 
religious  societies  to  take  and  hold  property,  manage,  use,  and  employ 
the  same,  and  choose  trustees,  agents,  and  officers  thereof,  and  con- 
stituted them  corporations  so  far  as  might  be  necessary." 

A  corporation  organized  for  religious  purposes  may  hold  as  much 
real  and  personal  estate  in  addition  to  its  meeting-house  as  may  be 
necessary  for  its  objects,  and  no  more.  It  may  vote  to  alter  and  en- 
large, repair,  rebuild,  or  remove  its  house,  or  to  build  a  new  one. 
Pews  in  churches  are  personal  estate.  (Massachusetts  Revised  Laws, 
1902,  chapter  xxxvi.,  sections  25,  27,  and  38.) 

Many  States  have  been  careful  to  provide  a  statute  under  which 
an  unincorporated  religious  society  may  become  a  corporation,  and 
may  hold  as  much  real  and  personal  estate  as  may  be  necessary  to 
its  objects.  Such  statutes  recognize  the  fact  that  the  beginning  of 
a  religious  society  may  be  extremely  modest,  the  society  containing 
but  a  few  persons  and  having  little  or  no  property,  and  yet  may  in 
a  few  years  become  strong  in  numbers  and  in  the  public  spirit  of 
its  members,  and  then  may  wish  to  hold  in  a  safe  and  permanent 
way  real  and  personal  property  to  considerable  amounts.  A  religious 
organization  may  maintain  regular  worship  and  exercise  other  appro- 
priate powers  without  being  a  corporation ;  but,  if  it  wishes  at  any 
time  to  become  a  corporation,  it  can  do  so.  Incorporated  or  unin- 
corporated religious  societies  may  appoint  trustees  to  hold  and  man- 
age trust  funds  for  their  benefit.  Care  has  been  taken  to  provide 
that  a  religious  society,  whether  incorporated  or  unincorporated, 
may  take  and  hold  any  estate  which  may  be  given  by  will  for  the 


285 

purposes  of  the  society;  and  some  States  are  careful  to  provide  that, 
if  such  a  bequest  should  exceed  in  amount  the  existing  limitation 
in  the  amount  of  property  said  society  is  authorized  to  hold,  it  shall 
be  lawful  for  the  society  to  take  and  hold  such  an  estate,  obtaining 
from  the  legislature,  within  one  year,  authority  to  take  and  hold 
real  and  personal  estate  to  an  amount  large  enough  to  include  the 
property  which  has  been  given  to  the  society  by  will. 

The  composition  of  the  corporation  which  may  hold  real  and 
personal  property  for  religious  uses  has  been  the  subject  of  numerous 
statutes.  The  members  of  the  church  proper — that  is,  the  com- 
municants in  any  church — are  not  usually  incorporated;  but  the 
corporation  is  a  body  composed  of  the  members  of  the  congregation, 
or  of  certain  officers  or  trustees,  chosen  or  appointed  in  accordance 
with  the  discipline  and  customs  in  each  religious  denomination. 

It  is  common  for  statutes  to  provide  that  no  corporation  organized 
for  religious  purposes  shall  at  any  time  possess  an  amount  of  prop- 
erty, excepting  church  buildings,  parsonages,  school-houses,  asylums, 
and  cemeteries,  the  income  from  which  shall  exceed  a  stipulated 
amount.  In  such  statutes  we  find  a  survival  of  the  ancient  English 
dread  of  unlimited  permanent  holdings  by  religious  bodies.  It  has 
been  easy,  however,  to  get  such  limits  extended  by  new  acts  of  the 
legislature. 

It  is  clear  that  all  through  the  legislation  concerning  church  prop- 
erty in  the  several  States  of  the  Union  the  holders  of  such  property 
are  not  regarded  as  proprietors  in  the  common  sense,  but  as  trustees. 
They  are  not  even  partly  proprietors  and  partly  trustees.  Under 
the  statutory  provisions,  however,  the  freedom  of  churches  to  acquire 
and  hold  property  for  religious  uses  is  almost  as  great  as  the  freedom 
of  a  person  to  acquire  and  hold  property  for  his  own  uses,  except 
that  there  is  ordinarily  some  statutory  limit  to  the  amount  of  real 
and  personal  property  which  a  church  organization  can  hold  in  addi- 
tion to  the  meeting-house. 

Occasionally  a  survival  of  European  precautions  against  the  abuse 
of  power  by  the  priests  of  a  dominant  church  appears  in  an  American 
statute.  Thus,  in  the  Revised  Laws  of  Louisiana,  published  in 
1897,  we  read  (page  140),  "No  church  corporation  or  minister  of 
the  gospel  for  himself  or  the  benefit  of  a  church  corporation  shall  be 
allowed  to  accept  a  bequest  made  in  articulo  mortis" 


286 

The  variety  of  uses  which  are  accepted  as  religious  uses  deserves 
notice.  Thus  homes  for  the  aged  and  the  poor,  mission  houses, 
school-houses,  medical  dispensaries,  residences  for  ministers,  teachers, 
or  employees,  cemeteries  or  lots  in  cemeteries  and  buildings  in  ceme- 
teries, are  all  considered  religious  uses  by  the  Statutes  of  New  York 
State  (chapter  xlii.  of  the  General  Laws  of  New  York,  sections  5 
and  7) ;  and  such  provisions  are  not  at  all  exceptional. 

The  alienation  of  the  property  of  religious  societies  is  generally 
regulated  by  statute,  the  general  purpose  of  such  statutes  being  to 
prevent  the  conversion  to  any  private  use  of  property,  real  or  personal, 
which  has  once  been  devoted  to  religious  uses.  For  example,  the 
Statutes  of  New  York  State  (chapter  xlii.  of  the  General  Laws, 
section  15)  provide  that,  when  an  ecclesiastical  governing  body,  like 
a  diocesan  convention  or  an  annual  conference,  having  jurisdiction 
over  several  churches,  has  been  incorporated,  the  incorporated  gov- 
erning body  may  decide  that  any  church  under  its  control  has  be- 
come extinct  if  for  two  preceding  years  it  has  held  no  religious  ser- 
vices according  to  the  custom  of  the  church,  or  has  had  less  than 
thirteen  resident  attending  members  paying  annual  pew  rents  or 
making  annual  contributions  to  its  support,  and  that  the  governing 
body  may  then  "take  possession  of  the  temporalities  belonging  to 
such  extinct  organization,  and  sell  or  dispose  of  the  same  and  apply 
the  proceeds  to  the  purposes  to  which  the  property  of  such  governing 
religious  body  is  devoted;  but  it  shall  not  divert  such  property  to 
any  other  object."  Section  19a  of  the  same  chapter  provides  that 
the  trustees  of  property  devoted  to  religious  uses,  and  held  by  them 
for  a  corporation,  may  apply  to  the  Supreme  Court  for  dissolution 
when  the  corporation  ceases  to  keep  up  religious  services,  and  the 
Supreme  Court  may,  except  in  the  city  and  county  of  New  York, 
if  it  deem  it  proper  to  do  so,  decree  a  dissolution,  order  a  sale  of  the 
property,  and  direct  the  surplus  over  debts  to  be  used  for  any  relig- 
ious, benevolent,  and  charitable  objects  or  purposes  suggested  by 
the  said  trustees  in  their  petition. 

The  laws  of  1905  in  the  State  of  Connecticut  (chapter  cxxxviii.) 
contain  an  interesting  provision  for  winding  up  the  affairs  of  a  re- 
ligious society  to  the  following  effect:  when  any  religious  society  has 
failed  to  keep  up  an  active  organization  for  two  years  or  more,  any 
members  or  interested  persons  thereof,  or  the  attorney-general,  or 


287 

the  State's  attorney  of  the  county,  may  present  a  petition  to  the 
county  court,  asking  for  a  winding-up,  whereupon  the  debts  of  the 
society  shall  be  paid;  but  none  of  the  property  shall  be  appropriated 
to  private  uses.  These  provisions  are,  however,  not  universal.  A 
New  Hampshire  statute  (compilation  of  1901,  chapter  cliii.,  section 
1)  provides  that  the  proprietors  of  a  meeting-house  which  has  ceased 
to  be  occupied  as  a  place  of  public  worship  for  a  space  of  two  years 
may  sell  the  same  and  divide  the  proceeds. 

Many  States  provide  that  the  minister  of  any  church,  if  a  United 
States  citizen,  shall  be  capable  of  taking  in  succession  parsonage 
land  granted  to  the  minister  and  his  successors,  or  to  the  use  of 
ministers,  and  may  prosecute  actions  touching  the  same. 

The  comprehensive  purpose  of  the  States  to  further  gifts  for  re- 
ligious uses  is  often  illustrated  by  the  statutory  provision  that  a 
legacy  to  a  religious  society  is  good,  if  there  be  enough  to  identify  the 
party  intended,  although  not  incorporated. 

The  civil  courts  in  the  United  States  have  done  much  to  explain 
and  interpret  the  relation  of  the  State  governments  to  churches  and 
religious  societies.  In  general,  they  have  been  very  careful  to  main- 
tain the  complete  separation  of  Church  and  State,  to  avoid  exercis- 
ing even  a  general  supervision  over  the  work  of  ecclesiastical  tribunals 
or  judicatories,  to  decline  intervention  in  disputes  relating  to  church 
discipline  or  in  questions  relating  to  faith  and  practice,  and  to  con- 
fine their  own  action  to  questions  relating  to  property  dedicated  to 
religious  uses  and  to  the  legal  rights  of  members  and  officers  of  relig- 
ious organizations.  The  courts  have  declared,  for  example,  that 
the  State  legal  tribunals  have  no  jurisdiction  over  a  church  (that  isr 
the  communicants)  or  its  members;  that  the  communicants  of  a 
church  have  no  greater  rights  as  corporators  than  any  other  members 
of  the  congregation  who  attend  divine  worship;  and  that  the  ecclesi- 
astical judicatories  cannot  interfere  with  the  property  relations  of  a 
religious  society  or  congregation,  and  cannot  remove  a  minister  with- 
out the  consent  of  a  majority  of  the  members  of  the  corporation  if 
the  religious  society  is  incorporated.  On  the  other  hand,  the  courts 
have  held  that,  if  a  minister  be  suspended  or  deposed  for  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal offence,  his  right  to  his  salary  and  emoluments  is  gone,  and  that 
the  decision  of  the  ecclesiastical  court  is  final  as  to  what  constitutes 
an  offence  against  the  discipline  of  the  church.    The  independent 


288 

churches,  of  course,  have  no  concern  with  any  superior  ecclesiasti- 
cal authorities;  but  for  the  rest  it  is  important  to  observe  that  neither 
the  doctrines  nor  the  practices  of  the  civil  courts  affect  the  discipline 
and  canons  of  any  highly  organized  church  like  the  Roman  Catholic, 
the  Protestant  Episcopal,  or  the  Methodist  Episcopal,  so  far  as 
ecclesiastical  matters  are  concerned.  The  courts  have  thus  main- 
tained the  boundary  between  Church  and  State,  leaving  each  active 
and  effective  in  its  sphere.  It  has  been  their  view  that  "the  free  ex- 
ercise and  enjoyment  of  religious  profession  and  worship  without 
discrimination,"  as  provided  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  cannot  be  maintained  if  the  civil  courts  trench  upon  the 
domain  of  the  Church,  construe  its  canons,  and  supervise  its  trials. 
The  courts  have  universally  declared  that  they  will  interfere  with 
churches  and  religious  associations  only  when  rights  of  property  or 
civil  rights  are  involved,  being  in  accord  in  this  respect  with  the  best 
English  authorities,  who  have  declared  that  "there  is  no  authority 
in  the  courts  ...  to  take  cognizance  of  the  rules  of  a  voluntary  so- 
ciety, entered  into  merely  for  the  regulation  of  its  own  affairs,  save 
only  so  far  as  it  may  be  necessary  for  the  due  disposal  or  adminis- 
tration of  property,"  or  again,  "A  court  of  law  will  not  interfere  with 
the  rules  of  a  voluntary  association  unless  it  is  necessary  to  do  so  to 
protect  some  civil  right  or  interest  which  is  said  to  be  infringed  by 
their  operation."  (Forbes  v.  Eden  Cases,  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
3d  Series,  vol.  v.,  36,  1867.) 

The  courts  have  insisted,  however,  that  religious  and  secular 
purposes  must  not  be  mixed  or  combined.  If  a  religious  society, 
based  on  the  acceptance  of  a  given  creed  and  the  maintenance  of  a 
certain  form  of  worship,  teaches  also  a  system  of  treating  diseases  by 
persons  trained  in  the  doctrines  of  the  religious  society,  a  sharp  dis- 
tinction has  been  made  by  the  courts  between  the  religious  objects  of 
such  a  society  and  its  secular  objects,  and  the  society  has  been  left 
free  in  regard  to  the  one,  but  not  free  with  regard  to  the  other.  In 
regard  to  its  system  of  treating  disease,  it  has  been  required  to  con- 
form to  the  law  regulating  the  practice  of  medicine. 

The  legal  tribunals  have  interpreted  and  enforced  the  statutory 
provisions  that  property  once  devoted  to  religious  uses  cannot  be 
alienated  and  converted  to  any  private  uses  whatever.  An  interest- 
ing case  of  this  sort  concerning  the  new  South  Meeting-house  in  Bos- 


289 

ton  was  the  occasion  of  a  clear  and  forcible  decision  on  this  subject 
by  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts  (13  Allen,  497).  Suit  was 
brought  by  a  majority  of  the  members  of  this  corporation,  the  petition 
setting  forth  that  the  corporation  owned  certain  land,  with  a  meeting- 
house thereon,  in  Boston;  that  it  had  become  much  decreased  in> 
numbers,  and  owed  a  large  sum  of  money  which  it  had  no  present 
means  of  paying,  and  that  its  annual  expenses  exceeded  its  revenues. 
The  petition  further  set  forth  that  a  meeting  of  the  proprietors  had 
voted  to  apply  to  the  courts  for  the  dissolution  of  the  corporation  and 
the  appointment  of  a  receiver,  who  might  sell  the  real  estate  and  dis- 
tribute the  net  proceeds  among  the  members  of  the  corporation. 
The  land  on  which  the  meeting-house  stood  had  been  granted  by 
the  town  of  Boston,  for  the  erection  thereon  "of  an  edifice  for  a  meet- 
ing-house, for  the  public  worship  of  God."  The  meeting-house  had 
been  built  by  private  contributions.  The  court  held  that  it  had  no 
power,  by  statute  or  otherwise,  to  authorize  sale  of  the  property 
of  this  corporation  and  the  distribution  of  the  avails  thereof  among 
its  members,  and  also  that,  if  the  court  had  such  power,  it  would  not 
be  reasonable  to  exercise  it.  The  opinion  of  the  court  declares  that 
"there  is  no  ground  for  supposing  that  the  trust  was  created  for 
the  private  pecuniary  advantage  or  gain  of  the  individual  members  of 
the  society.  The  object  to  be  accomplished  and  perpetuated  was 
a  much  higher  one.  It  was  to  establish  a  permanent  society  for  the 
public  worship  of  God,  with  all  the  incidents,  rights,  and  privileges 
which,  according  to  the  usage  and  practice  in  this  Commonwealth 
at  that  period  of  time,  have  pertained  to  such  bodies.  .  .  .  We  look  in 
vain  for  any  provision  which  authorizes,  even  by  implication,  an 
alienation  of  the  property  by  the  act  of  the  majority  for  purposes 
foreign  to  those  for  which  it  was  held  by  the  corporation,  with  a  view 
to  its  appropriation  for  purposes  of  private  gain  or  a  distribution 
of  it  into  shares  by  which  the  owners  of  pews  are  made  stockholders,, 
entitled  to  the  whole  beneficial  use  of  the  property  discharged  of  all 
trusts."  And  again,  "The  power  of  the  proprietors  acting  by  a 
majority,  in  this  as  in  all  other  corporations,  is  limited  to  matters 
properly  embraced  within  the  purposes  for  which  the  corporation 
was  created."  And,  finally,  "We  are  unanimous  in  the  opinion, 
for  the  reasons  we  have  stated,  that,  if  we  had  the  power,  it  would  be 
most  unreasonable  for  us,  on  the  facts  disclosed  at  the  hearing,  at 


290 

the  request  of  a  majority  of  the  members  and  against  the  protest 
of  a  minority,  to  sanction  the  destruction  of  trusts  reposed  in  the 
corporation  which  is  the  subject  of  this  proceeding,  and  pervert  the 
property  from  the  uses  to  which  it  was  dedicated  by  the  pious  founders 
of  the  parish." 

Under  this  American  legislative  and  judicial  method  of  maintaining 
and  fostering  free  churches  in  free  States,  churches,  States,  and 
citizens  are  alike  contented.  All  kinds  of  Christians,  together  with 
Jews,  Confucians,  and  Buddhists,  enjoy  a  perfect  religious  liberty, 
all  kinds  of  ecclesiastical  organizations  find  their  property  rights 
secure  and  their  internal  discipline  in  no  way  interfered  with,  while 
the  States  are  exempt  from  the  intense  religious  strifes  which  Euro- 
pean governments  still  have  to  dread.  The  civil  status  of  churches 
in  the  United  States  has  no  parallel,  because  the  conditions  under 
which  it  arose  and  has  been  developed  are  unparalleled.  Never- 
theless, it  is  a  good  model  for  cautious  imitation. 


291 


THE   GOOD   AND   EVIL   OF  DENOMINATIONS. 

BY     PROFESSOR     FRANCIS    A.     CHRISTIE,     MEADVTLLE     THEOLOGICAL 

SCHOOL. 

Church  freedom  culminates  in  Congregationalism,  the  resolution 
of  the  visible  church  into  local  units.  Being  asked  to  appraise  the 
gain  and  the  loss  of  such  a  result,  I  would  fain  justify  such  a  polity 
by  justifying  all  differences  of  polity  and  yet  repudiate  the  spirit  of 
schism.  Denominational  divisions  are  an  accomplished  fact. 
Grant  that  they  will  long  continue  or  even  be  permanent,  do  they 
preclude  a  genuine  catholicity  in  sentiment  and  in  practical  co-opera- 
tion ?  Can  the  spirit  of  denominationalism  consist  with  the  claim  of 
the  Church  Universal?  Though  we  may  hesitate  to  claim  a  com- 
plete solution  of  such  a  problem,  we  may  expect  some  benefit  from 
any  attempt  to  define  the  problem. 

Church,  Denomination,  Sect, — this  is  a  descending  scale  of  merit, 
and  probably  no  man  is  of  so  low  a  preference  as  to  admit  that  he  is 
a  sectarian.  But  what  is  church  and  what  is  sect?  The  answer  is 
not  easy  unless  we  start  from  the  principle  of  catholicity  and  from 
that  zealous  practice  of  catholicity  which  sought  to  gather  and  con- 
strain all  citizens  within  the  confines  of  one  ecclesiastical  institution. 
With  Father  Tyrrell  we  may  understand  catholicity  as  "the  ideal  of 
a  spiritually  united  humanity  centred  around  Christ  in  one  divine 
society."  In  1500  England  acknowledged  a  Roman  Catholic  Church 
which  for  all  Western  Europe  was  the  embodiment  of  that  ideal.  In 
1600  there  was  one  reformed  Church  of  England,  no  longer  Catholic, 
since  reduced  to  national  limits  and  alienated  from  many  features  of 
the  Catholic  past,  but  retaining  still  a  Catholic  consciousness  in  pre- 
scribing one  religious  system  for  the  entire  nation.  Since  1700  there 
have  been  denominations  without  pretence  to  actual  catholicity, 
though  something  of  the  old  sentiment  survived  in  their  hopes  and 
aspirations  for  the  allegiance  of  the  whole  community.    Even  the  in- 


292 

dependent  autonomous  congregations  which  repudiated  the  idea  of  a 
national  church  and  limited  their  membership  to  the  covenanted 
saints  retained  so  much  of  the  Catholic  social  consciousness  as  to 
insist  on  moulding  and  controlling  the  life  of  the  non-elect.  We 
seem  to  reach  the  point  of  sect  when  this  collective  social  conscious- 
ness wholly  vanishes  and  a  group  sequesters  and  secludes  itself  from 
the  general  community  without  offering  itself  as  the  ideal  of  that 
community.  Such  a  point  may  be  hard  to  discover  in  any  group  of 
men.  If  there  were  tendencies  thereto  in  the  past,  they  have  ceased. 
Ever  since  the  irritating,  coercive  policy  of  the  state  was  definitely 
abandoned,  a  Catholic  spirit,  a  Catholic  social  consciousness,  has 
been  reviving  in  all  bodies.  With  the  recent  powerful  growth  of 
social  solidarity  in  other  spheres  of  life,  denominations  desire  more  and 
more  to  conceive  themselves  as  religious  expressions  of  the  whole 
community,  as  societies  which  mirror  the  ideal  of  the  whole  body  of 
man.  This  tendency  and  aspiration  is  not  due  to  any  institutional 
form  of  organization.  Even  those  of  us  who,  with  our  passion  for 
freedom  from  external  authority,  seem  to  be  the  extreme  expression 
of  Protestant  individualism,  hear  from  our  own  midst  a  clamor  for  a 
better  title  than  any  inherited  name,  for  a  title  descriptive  of  our 
aim  rather  than  our  origin, — the  tide  of  the  Free  Catholic  Church. 
The  generous  idealism  of  young  men,  impatient  of  any  name  that 
falls  short  of  the  catholicity  of  universal  religion,  is  often  blind  to 
the  larger  and  finer  intentions  of  old  designations,  though  the  growth 
of  historical  sympathy  and  historical  comprehension  enables  an  ever- 
widening  number  to  view  the  whole  past  with  a  new  temper  and  to 
claim  its  saints  and  its  sanctities  as  contributive  to  the  one  consecrat- 
ing and  dynamic  spiritual  life  which  bears  us  onward.  That  social 
unity  of  brotherhood  in  one  spiritual  family  unchecked  by  time  or 
place,  that  unity  which  the  Catholic  claims  as  his  ideal,  is  an  ideal 
increasingly  sovereign  among  divided  Protestants  and  acknowledged 
by  them  as  entering  into  the  essence  and  definition  of  Christianity. 
The  idea  of  evolution  has  given  a  new  validity  to  the  Catholic  insist- 
ence on  tradition,  if  only  tradition  is  seen  and  held  as  something 
elastic  and  capable  of  permutation, — an  evolution  through  us  rather 
than  simply  an  inheritance  brought  unchanged  to  us,  an  evolution 
with  vistas  into  a  spiritual  future  richer,  freer,  larger  than  past  or 
present.    With  this  new  temper  and  tendency,  how  shall  we  judge 


293 

the  great  diversification  which  our  Protestant  world  exhibits?  Do 
these  divisions  of  organization  divert  us  from  one  destiny,  one  ideal, 
one  duty?  Are  they  symptoms  of  malady  or  of  health?  Are  they 
disintegration  or  wholesome  differentiations  of  one  expanding  vitality  ? 
Let  us  not  ignore  the  bitterness  and  animosity  attending  the  birth 
of  these  divisions.  There  was  enmity  and  strife  so  long  as  society 
aimed  at  coercive  uniformity  either  through  state  law  or  social  mis- 
prision. But,  now  that  the  diversities  are  accepted,  reflection  shows 
that  the  breach  of  harmony  was  overestimated.  Men  fancied  that 
it  was  theological  separation,  and  some  men  have  come  to  say,  as 
a  thing  solemnly  indisputable,  that  theology  is  always  divisive. 
But  it  is  plain,  on  the  other  hand,  that  neither  the  piety  charac- 
teristic of  Protestantism  nor  its  doctrinal  expression  were  the  things 
at  stake  save  in  very  recent  instances.  The  dividing  issues  were 
matters  of  practical  social  adaptation  rather  than  matters  of  cen- 
tral faith.  Mere  diversity  of  action  and  expression  and  forms  of 
concerted  life  can  consist  with  unity  of  collective  movement.  To 
insist  on  complete  uniformity  is  to  reduce  life  to  mechanism.  Even 
the  Catholic  unity  of  the  Middle  Ages  contained  within  itself  na- 
tional differences,  diverse  local  usages,  varieties  of  religious  orders 
unlike  in  organization  and  distinguishable  in  methods.  These 
were  variations  which  did  not  mean  a  disintegration  of  the  organic 
unity.  The  soul  was  one, — it  was  Catholic  religion.  The  diversifi- 
cation was  healthful  and  demanded  by  life  itself  rather  than  by  re- 
flective theory  or  by  a  dissident  spirit.  It  was  necessitated  by  natural 
and  inevitable  differences  of  race,  culture,  aesthetic  capacity,  practi- 
cal instincts.  It  gave  a  richer  and  more  complex  adaptability  of 
the  one  religion  to  a  life  which  in  other  than  religious  relations  be- 
came complex.  The  variations  did  not  mean  schism  or  severance 
of  spiritual  unity.  Now,  save  for  the  lack  of  obedience  to  one  central 
administrative  authority,  most  of  the  divisions  of  Protestantism  are 
exactly  like  this  diversification  within  the  older  mother  church. 
They  fostered  the  same  conception  of  the  religious  relationship  of 
man  and  God.  They  were  not  severances  in  the  spiritual  principle 
of  Protestantism.  They  were  variations  of  the  bodily  expression 
rather  than  of  the  animating  soul.  The  facts  refute  those  critics  of 
Protestantism  who  point  to  these  divisions  as  due  to  doctrinal  anarchy, 
the  dissolving  of  the  one  faith  into  capricious  individual  beliefs.    In 


2Q4 

Elizabeth's  time  the  main  parties  were  already  forming, — Episco- 
pal, Presbyterian,  Brownist, — but  all  were  Calvinists  in  theology. 
All  agreed  as  to  the  relations  existing  between  God  and  man,  as  to  the 
theory  of  human  redemption,  as  to  the  meaning  of  faith.  It  is  true 
that  in  the  seventeenth  century  the  Episcopal  party  became,  for 
the  most  part,  Arminian;  but  this  theological  difference  was  not  the 
fruit  of  searching  reflection.  It  was  a  somewhat  artificial  theologi- 
cal difference,  a  bit  of  strategy  of  ecclesiastical  leaders  of  a  party 
political  rather  than  doctrinal.  It  was  a  strategic  relaxation  of  Cal- 
vinism before  a  party  zealous  for  Genevan  standards  of  polity.  What 
do  the  Arminians  hold?  asked  a  puzzled  layman.  "They  hold," 
said  Dr.  Morley,  of  Oxford,  "all  the  best  bishoprics  and  deaneries  of 
England."  Presbyterian  and  Congregationalist  parted  from  one 
another,  though  they  had  complete  unanimity  in  their  Calvinist 
theology  and  their  methods  of  effecting  religious  experience.  At  a 
later  time,  when  Arminian  views  were  dominant,  came  the  great 
Methodist  divergence  from  the  State  Church.  This  was  in  no  de- 
gree a  theological  separation.  When  the  Methodist  body  itself 
divided  into  numerous  branches,  there  was  not  a  shadow  of  theologi- 
cal dissension.  These  great  differentiations  were  due  to  divergent 
choices  in  the  matter  of  the  organization  and  discipline  of  the  relig- 
ious community.  These  choices  were  matters  of  serious  conviction 
that  appealed  to  Scripture  as  authority;  but,  when  we  ask  why  the 
plastic  and  neutral  language  of  Scripture  was  so  sharply  interpreted 
and  with  such  stress  of  party  spirit,  we  find  that  the  convictions  did 
not  spring  from  men's  religious  experiences.  They  corresponded  to 
political  and  social  tendencies  in  those  generations  of  English  life. 
The  existing  political  divisions,  the  divergent  ideals  of  social  organi- 
zation, manifested  themselves  in  the  religious  sphere,  insisting  that  the 
communal  life  of  the  Church  should  correspond  to  what  were  viewed 
as  the  necessary  laws  of  any  communal  life.  Religion  has  too  long 
borne  the  reproach  of  these  old  passions  and  animosities.  Let  us 
consign  them  where  they  belong, — an  odium  politicum,  originating 
in  other  instincts  than  those  of  piety.  We  will  not  justify  the  stress 
and  strain,  and  yet  we  may  accept  these  varying  institutional  forms 
as  proper  to  the  conditions  of  human  nature.  Just  as  unity  in  the 
fundamentals  of  religion  did  not  prevent  their  appearance,  so  a 
substantial  doctrinal  agreement  cannot  prevent  their  persistence. 


295 

They  correspond  to  persistent  differences  in  the  sphere  of  practical 
social  co-operation,  differences  which  are  not  necessarily  evil.  Rhode 
Island  and  Pennsylvania  will  probably  differ  permanently  in  their 
methods  of  political  action,  while  they  are  harmoniously  one  in  the 
Americanism  of  the  Union  of  States.  So  Christian  unity  may  be 
expressed  through  a  diversity  of  governments  and  administrations. 

Let  us  not  forget,  moreover,  certain  positive  compensations.  In 
the  formal  unity  which  preceded  the  denominations,  activity  and  re- 
sponsibility was  concentrated  in  a  few  hands.  The  mass  of  men 
were  passive  and  inert.  Divisions  in  the  formal  unity  brought  more 
persons  and  persons  of  all  social  classes  into  directive  activity  and 
responsibility  in  the  conduct  of  religious  societies.  This  tendency 
has  its  theoretical  culmination  in  Congregationalism,  where  the 
minister's  activity,  whatever  it  be,  is  viewed  as  delegated  to  him  by 
the  congregation.  The  result  of  this  tendency  has  been  the  liberation 
of  hitherto  dominant  energy.  The  process  resembles  the  beneficent 
transition  from  autocracy  or  oligarchy  to  democratic  society,  the  tran- 
sition from  a  multitude  passive  to  a  multitude  active.  Some  so- 
called  sects  have  arisen  solely  through  the  pressure  of  the  unfran- 
chised plebs  to  obtain  a  share  in  religious  citizenship  and  mission- 
ary action.  This  is  strikingly  the  case  in  the  history  of  Methodism, 
where  the  purpose  of  division  has  been  simply  to  secure  freedom  of 
action  for  classes  and  individuals  in  the  employment  of  aims  and 
methods  common  to  all  Methodism.  Every  secession,  too,  ends  in 
concession  by  the  older  group.  The  net  result  is  a  wider  distribu- 
tion of  activity  and  the  employment  of  multiplied  energy.  The 
history  of  Methodism  is  a  complete  disproof  of  the  common  saying 
that  Protestantism  is  weakened  by  its  divisions. 

The  apologist  for  denominations  will  discover  other  facts  that 
engage  his  sympathy.  He  will  note  cases  where  the  formative  im- 
pulse, so  far  from  being  that  of  a  dissident  individualistic  spirit,  was 
simply  and  solely  a  social  impulse  which  could  not  otherwise  assert 
itself.  In  our  large  cities  we  see  the  establishment  of  separate 
Catholic  parishes  for  immigrant  Poles,  Portuguese,  French,  or  Ger- 
mans. No  one  presumes  to  call  this  a  schismatic  tendency.  Just 
so  in  American  Protestantism.  Racial  and  economic  diversities 
enforced  new  formations  simply  to  enable  new  classes  to  obtain  a 
social  union  in  religion  which  could  not  be  immediately  enjoyed  in 


296 

churches  of  the  older  order.  We  may  instance  the  United  Brethren 
and  Albright's  Evangelical  Association.  They  are  counted  as  de- 
nominations. In  reality  they  are  only  Methodism  in  a  population 
restricted  to  the  use  of  German.  If  Asbury's  followers  had  pro- 
vided German  preachers,  these  separate  bodies  would  hardly  have 
come  into  existence  and  their  separate  existence  need  not  long  con- 
tinue. Economic  and  social  conditions  have  operated  in  a  similar 
way.  Nowhere  is  there  such  need  of  association  as  in  the  less  privi- 
leged members  of  society.  Among  them  new  bodies  have  arisen  in 
order  to  secure  a  richer  and  more  intense  moral  fellowship  without 
the  disturbing  differences  of  economic  and  social  station.  Needs 
have  thus  found  relief  which  would  otherwise  have  been  suppressed, 
and  the  wholesome  consequence  for  America  is  a  diminution  of  that 
social  tension  which  in  some  European  communities  tends  to  alienate 
whole  social  classes  from  the  Church.  We  will  deplore  not  the 
emergence  of  such  new  groups,  but  only  the  cause  of  them;  and  we 
may  believe  that  these  efforts  of  democratic  life  to  find  new  channels 
will  make  the  older  churches  unwilling  to  acknowledge  themselves 
as  unadapted  to  democracy. 

My  argument  is  that  all  the  leading  varieties  of  Protestantism 
had  practical  necessitations  and  did  not  spring  from  any  disloyalty 
to  the  religiosity  which  was  distinctive  of  Protestantism.  It  is  prob- 
ably apparent  to  most  people,  however,  that  division  can  and  does 
degenerate  into  needless  and  ruinous  competition.  When  the  moral 
and  religious  needs  of  a  community  are  not  served  but  hindered  by 
division,  then  indeed  denominations  are  the  weakness  of  Protestant 
religion.  I  will  not  dilate  upon  these  evils.  They  are  summed  up  in 
the  trenchant  words  of  President  Benjamin  Andrews:  "In  cities 
numerous  powerful  congregations  huddle  together  where  one  of  them 
could  do  as  much  good  as  all  do  now.  Every  mission  field  in  a 
wealthy  neighborhood  is  fought  for  by  a  half-score  of  denominations, 
while  the  dives  and  slums  are  neglected  about  in  proportion  to  their 
need.  In  each  country  town  two,  four,  six,  sometimes  eight  or  ten 
apologies  for  churches  try  to  live  where  one  strong  one  would 
suffice,  where,  moreover,  such  a  strong  church  could  easily  be  built 
up  by  combination  of  effort,  and  where,  being  erected,  it  would  have 
ten  times  the  saving  power  which  all  the  weaklings  at  present 
exert." 


297 

This  quotation  may  suffice,  for  it  suggests  the  economic  impossi- 
bility of  continuing  such  a  system.  Economic  considerations  alone 
will  force  on  the  attention  of  all  Christian  people  the  folly  and  the 
ruin  of  such  competitions.  But  economic  considerations  cannot 
furnish  the  spirit  and  disposition  which  will  successfully  heal  these 
evils.  If  there  is  to  be  a  new  policy  of  concerted,  friendly,  federated 
action,  a  new  temper  and  a  new  conviction  must  be  generated  for  it. 
The  spiritual  conditions  for  new  methods  seem  to  be  surely  and 
swiftly  arriving. 

Denominations,  I  have  affirmed,  are  ultimately  due  to  tempera- 
mental differences  in  the  organization  and  administration  of  societies. 
Practical  instincts  initiated  them:  later  they  are  differentiated  more 
subtly  in  detail.  But  why  unfriendly,  intolerant,  insistent  on  ex- 
clusive dominion?  Why  led  to  invade  the  sphere  of  others?  The 
main  justification  for  this  was  the  illusion  of  Scriptural  necessita- 
tion.  This  made  divergent  practical  tendencies  to  become  dogmas. 
Revelation  made  the  polity  and  practice  a  mandate  for  the  conscience 
of  believers.  That  a  church  should  be  so  and  so  conducted,  and  not 
otherwise,  was  the  will  of  God.  This  was  the  claim,  and  only  this 
argument  could  justify  an  intolerance  and  warfare  ruinous  to  the 
peace  of  the  Church  of  God.  To-day  the  justification  is  forever  gone. 
The  old  argument  for  denominational  polity  is  permanently  im- 
possible. Once  there  were  fashions  in  exegesis.  Now  there  are  no 
fashions  but  the  permanent  achievement  of  an  historical  scientific 
comprehension  of  the  Bible,  and  the  achievement  initiates  sweeping 
changes.  The  authority  of  Christ  cannot  be  claimed  for  the  outer 
form  of  any  instituted  church.  Denominations  are  obliged  to  re- 
nounce the  dogmatic  claim  for  themselves.  They  must  advocate 
their  methods  of  organizing  and  administering  the  religious  society 
on  grounds  of  reason  and  expediency.  One  may  still  prefer  episco- 
pal superintendency  or  synodal  control  or  congregational  autonomy, 
but  reason  and  expediency  will  not  allow  a  preference  to  weaken  the 
religious  life  of  a  whole  neighborhood. 

Everywhere  we  see  the  extension  of  a  critical  spirit,  the  decay  of 
the  dogma  concerning  polity,  the  cessation  of  the  argument  from 
revelation,  an  indifference  to  the  old  contentions.  We  need  not 
ask  that  the  gains  of  the  old  historical  development  be  surrendered. 
Humanity  having  repudiated  a  uniformity  of  organization,  the  con- 


298 

genial  diversity  may  be  retained.  But  the  new  spirit  asks  that  they 
be  retained  in  some  new  condition  of  friendly  and  concerted  action,  as 
diversities  of  relative  value  subordinate  to  that  inclusive  fellowship 
of  the  whole  religious  community  which  now  after  long  suppression 
labors  to  assert  itself.  Friendly  co-operation  is  all  the  more  pos- 
sible since  the  diverse  polities,  working  themselves  out  as  great  his- 
toric experimentations,  have  come  nearer  to  one  another  in  their 
actual  practice.  In  the  free  American  life  the  more  centralized 
polities  tend  to  a  fuller  recognition  of  congregational  home  rule,  and, 
on  the  other  hand, autonomous  congregations  have  actually  developed 
agencies  of  collective  enterprise  and  some  form  of  superintendency. 
Many  will  admit  all  that  is  thus  said  about  the  bodily  forms  of 
church  life  and  yet  doubt  the  possibility  of  a  full  and  genuine  co- 
operation. For,  though  theological  cleavage  did  not  produce  de- 
nominations, they  have,  in  fact,  been  differentiated  in  doctrine. 
They  were  Calvinist,  Arminian,  Lutheran,  and  the  churches  repre- 
sented in  this  Conference  owe  their  separate  organization  distinctly 
to  a  theological  division.  This  is  indeed  a  fact,  but  it  is  a  past  fact. 
That  change  of  attitude  toward  the  Bible  which  involves  a  reduction 
in  the  rival  claims  of  denominations  is  only  one  aspect  of  a  vaster 
and  momentous  change.  Our  churches  here  assembled  have  an 
explicit  and  defined  liberalism,  but  there  is  a  less  explicit  and  more 
hesitating  liberalism  in  all  the  other  churches.  In  each  and  every 
denomination  there  are  multitudes  of  individuals  holding  the  views 
of  modern  liberalism,  and  this  wide-spread  reconstruction  rests  on 
necessities  of  thought  so  deep  that  the  results  must  appear  in  every 
quarter.  The  reconstruction  follows  whenever  the  methods  of 
modern  intelligence  are  applied  to  the  subject  of  religion,  whether 
the  thinker  be  Protestant  or  Romanist.  For  the  first  time  in  history 
theology  is  becoming  a  science.  For  the  first  time  in  history  it  is 
pursued  with  the  methods  of  scientific  inquiry  and  with  the  temper 
of  the  scientific  spirit.  Here  is  a  great  unifying  force  which  never 
before  has  operated.  Science  is  interdenominational,  international,, 
universally  human,  catholic.  So  far  as  the  data  of  theology  are 
historical  facts,  they  are  now  to  be  ascertained,  stated,  valued,  accord- 
ing to  standards  of  historical  judgment  everywhere  accepted.  It  is 
possible,  it  is  necessary,  for  all  Protestants  and  all  Catholics  to  hold 
the  same  views  as  to  the  origins  of  Christianity  and  the  development 


299 

of  its  dogmas  and  institutions.  If  they  will  not,  they  must  pay  the 
price:  they  must  forfeit  the  respect  of  the  modern  world,  for  the 
modern  world  is  a  world  of  science.  All  men  everywhere  can  inter- 
pret the  inner  life  and  purpose  of  the  Christian  movement  by  an 
historical  study  which  penetrates  beneath  the  formulas  of  councils 
and  the  decrees  of  prelates  and  the  constructions  of  old  divines.  All 
men  everywhere  with  the  same  historical  and  psychological  method 
can  define  and  determine  the  actual  religious  experiences  of  men,  of 
Augustine,  of  Bernard,  of  Francis,  of  Luther,  of  Fox,  of  Channing. 
They  can  by  one  and  the  same  accepted  method  unfold  all  the  thought 
implicated  in  these  undeniable  and  real  experiences.  They  can 
develop  thus  together  out  of  the  same  facts  of  life,  by  the  same  method 
of  analysis,  the  propositions,  the  doctrine,  implicit  in  the  Christian 
religious  life.  There  is  growing  up  an  organism  of  such  knowledge 
and  comprehension  which  is  the  guidance  and  control  of  all  individ- 
ual beliefs.  Those  who  labor  in  schools  of  theology  know  that  the 
old  ecclesiastical  lines  have  been  submerged  by  this  arriving  and  ex- 
pected consensus  of  scientific  theology.  The  ministers  of  all  churches 
will  soon  discover  that  their  interpretations  of  religion  have  been 
shaped  in  the  same  school.  Our  colleges  and  universities  begin  to 
engage  the  laity  in  this  theological  science,  for  it  is  an  inquiry  no  longer 
hampered  by  denominational  interests.  Men  of  every  church 
affiliation  share  amiably  in  the  discussions  of  the  Hibbert  Journal  or 
the  American  Journal  of  Theology,  not  as  already  adhering  to  the 
same  conclusions,  yet  possessed  by  one  spirit  and  pursuing  one  goal. 
The  consequences  of  this  overwhelming  change  have  not  yet  fully 
exhibited  themselves,  but  it  is  already  evident  that  this  new 
attitude  and  bearing  of  the  Christian  consciousness  is  dispossessing 
the  spirit  of  the  partisan  zealot  and  is  ushering  in  the  spirit  of  Catholic 
unity.  To  this  new  organism  of  religious  inquiry  we,  above  all  men, 
plight  our  troth;  for  its  doctrines  can  never  become  dogma.  The 
freedom  from  intellectual  prescription  which  we  have  made  a  prin- 
ciple of  our  institutional  life  will  be  the  very  principle  of  the  theology 
of  the  impending  day  of  the  church  general.  Shall  we  not  predict, 
then,  the  victory  of  that  conception  of  all  our  religious  associations 
which  we  mean  when  we  speak  of  the  Catholic  Church  ?  To  be  a 
reality,  the  Catholic  Church  does  need  to  become  an  objectified,  ma- 
terialized uniformity.     Being  a  spiritual  power,  it  has  its  reality  in 


300 

use  and  purpose,  as  a  power  sovereign  over  the  aims  and  endeavors, 
the  affections  and  the  hearts,  of  men.  Each  and  every  congregation, 
whatever  its  procedure  and  form,  will  acknowledge  itself  as  the  local 
expression  of  one  divine  society  uniting  all  men  in  the  life  which  is 
redemption  from  all  selfish  and  sensual  aims  and  an  engagement  to 
that  supreme  and  supersensual  realm  which  we  name  the  kingdom 
of  God.  We  may  not  know  how  speedily  or  by  what  paths  we  shall 
meet  in  that  promised  land,  but  to  descry  its  fair,  alluring  prospect 
from  any  peak  of  vision  wakens  now  the  heart-beat  of  that  holy  fel- 
lowship and  comradeship  in  spiritual  quest  which  is  the  deepest  and 
most  enduring  yearning  in  the  spirit  of  man. 


3d 


FAITH  AS  AFFECTED  BY  FREEDOM. 

BY  GEORGE  A.   GORDON,    D.D.,  PASTOR  OLD  SOUTH  CONGREGATIONAL 
CHURCH,   BOSTON. 

Among  the  religious  people  of  this  country  faith  in  its  profoundest 
meaning  stands  for  the  life  of  the  soul  in  God  as  God  is  presented 
to  men  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  universe  is  conceived  as  made  up,  in 
its  final  account,  of  soul.  There  is  the  infinite  soul,  there  are  the 
souls  of  men,  there  is  the  great  historic  soul  of  Jesus,  serving  as  a 
mirror  both  of  the  divine  and  the  human.  The  essence  of  Christian 
faith  is  righteous  living,  or  the  ideal  of  it,  the  pursuit  and  hope 
of  it,  in  relation  to  all  human  souls,  in  relation  to  the  eternal  soul, 
and  by  his  grace.  Our  American  Christianity  is  so  far  apostolic 
Christianity:  it  is  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus.  Our 
American  Christianity  is  so  far  Augustinian  and  Lutheran :  it  begins 
with  a  great  experience,  the  contents  of  the  soul  precede  intellectual 
inquiry,  a  world  of  vision  and  love  is  the  precious  primary  posses- 
sion. This  life  in  the  God  and  Father  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  father's 
God,  the  God  who  made  the  universe  and  all  things  therein,  is  our 
one  fundamental  and  essential  interest.  With  the  German  mystic 
we  say  we  live  in  God,  like  the  bird  in  the  air,  like  the  fish  in  the 
deep. 

Our  interest  in  faith  as  a  body  of  ideas  springs  from  our  interest 
in  faith  as  the  life  of  the  soul  in  God.  Our  great  theologians  have 
been  men  of  profound  religious  experience,  and  because  of  the  depth 
and  urgency  of  their  spiritual  life  they  have  sought  a  philosophy  of 
religion.  The  deepest  thing  in  Edwards — that  which  is  great  enough 
to  remain  part  of  the  sacred  tradition  of  mankind — is  his  rapture  in 
God  and  his  stern  self-discipline  in  the  interest  of  this  rapt  existence. 
The  sources  of  the  nobler  part  of  his  teaching  are  in  his  Christian 
heart.  In  regard  to  the  whole  circle  of  his  ideas,  interest  to-day  is 
won  for  them  by  the  greatness  of  Edwards's  soul.    His  successors, 


3°2 

direct  and  indirect,  Edwards  the  younger,  Bellamy,  Hopkins, 
Emmons,  Taylor,  Bushnell,  Park,  Channing,  and  Theodore  Parker, 
all  began  with  religion  as  life,  and  in  the  service  of  this  life  each 
built  up  the  faith  as  a  body  of  ideas.  When  the  gifted  child  looks 
out  with  eyes  of  wonder  upon  the  earth  and  the  sky,  he  takes  in  at 
once  in  his  rapt  vision  the  whole  mystery  of  the  outward  world,  and, 
when  the  scientist  and  the  philosopher  arrive,  they  arrive  in  the  in- 
terest of  that  primary  vision.  When  the  soul  awakes  to  the  beauty 
of  the  Lord  our  God,  it  includes  in  its  life  eternal  realities,  and  when 
the  theologian  comes,  he  does  but  translate  into  ideas  some  of  the 
meanings  of  this  original  and  ineffable  experience  of  the  heart. 

Here  in  America,  and  emphatically  in  New  England,  freedom 
is  regarded  as  the  condition  essential  to  religious  life  and  thought. 
While  somewhat  limited  in  scope,  freedom  has  been  intelligently 
viewed  and  dearly  prized  in  this  land  of  freedom  from  the  earliest 
days.  The  great  thinkers  of  New  England  were  innovators.  No 
master  was  acknowledged,  although  the  great  tradition  of  theology 
was  deeply  respected.  Within  twenty  miles  of  this  city  Calvinism 
became,  in  the  hands  of  Nathaniel  Emmons,  a  profound  and  thor- 
oughly reasoned  pantheism,  yet  no  voice  of  authority  called  him  to 
account.  Heretics,  like  Bushnell  and  Channing,  had  complete 
freedom.  Great  preachers,  like  Henry  Ward  Beecher  and  Phillips 
Brooks,  gave  their  message  under  no  sense  of  outward  restraint. 
In  the  older  communities  of  America  to-day  intellectual  freedom  is 
a  sure  achievement.  We  no  longer  ask  about  a  scholar  in  theology, 
Is  he  orthodox  in  his  views,  is  he  a  follower  of  the  tradition  of  the 
church  upon  his  subject?  but,  Is  he  competent,  is  he  eminent,  is  he 
sane,  is  he  genuinely  a  person  of  the  scientific  spirit,  and  is  he  work- 
ing in  his  theological  science  in  the  interest  of  a  divine  life  in  hu- 
manity which  he  shares  with  all  the  wise  and  brave  ? 

Here  in  America  we  are  finding  that  freedom  is  simply  a  condi- 
tion of  inquiry.  It  is  simply  a  fair  chance  to  test  the  validity  of 
ideas,  to  examine  the  worth  of  opinions,  to  search  the  foundations 
of  belief  upon  all  subjects.  It  does  not  necessarily  mean  change  of 
belief.  The  same  beliefs  may  stand,  and  stand  far  more  surely,  in 
the  mind  of  the  freeman  than  in  the  mind  under  limitation.  To-day 
in  the  Harvard  Divinity  School,  where  freedom  is  perhaps  larger 
and  surer  than  in  any  other  similar  institution  in  the  land,  opinion 


3°3 

is  frequently  more  favorable  to  conservative  views  than  in  seminaries 
under  decided  restriction.  Freedom  is  only  a  condition  of  judg- 
ment: it  is  one  of  two  contrasted  conditions.  Men  must  think 
either  under  authority  or  under  freedom,  and  from  the  earliest 
times  here  in  New  England  there  has  been  a  growing  tendency  to 
trust  truth  to  the  conscience  of  the  freeman. 

This  we  regard  as  a  great  discovery.  Our  conservatives  love  the 
old  ideas  because  of  their  relation  to  life.  When,  therefore,  they 
see  the  liberal  dealing  tenderly  with  these  ideas  on  account  of  that 
relation,  and  surrendering  them  only  as  they  are  developed  into 
fitter  servants  of  life,  when  these  older  leaders  see  that  freedom  does 
not  necessarily  mean  denial  or  intellectual  revolution,  but  simply  a 
more  promising  condition  of  intellectual  work,  when  they  witness 
the  interests  that  were  fading  under  compulsion  flourishing  and 
secure  under  freedom,  their  natural  prejudices  give  way.  The 
eternal  interests  of  the  soul  remain  the  same.  They  are  still  revered, 
they  are  still  served,  but  now  by  the  freeman,  and  no  longer  by  the 
bondman.  Perhaps  an  academic  example  will  show  more  clearly 
how  we  have  verified  our  discovery.  About  five  and  thirty  years  ago 
what  is  known  as  the  Elective  System  was  introduced  at  Harvard 
College.  That  system  means  freedom  for  the  student  in  the  selec- 
tion of  subjects.  At  first  it  was  adopted  under  limitations,  later  it 
became  the  policy  of  the  college  through  the  entire  course  of  study. 
It  has  since  spread  through  all  departments  of  the  University.  What 
has  been  the  result?  The  intellectual  interests  believed  to  be  es- 
sential under  the  system  of  compulsion  are  recognized  as  essential 
under  freedom.  Greek,  Latin,  Mathematics,  Modern  Languages, 
History,  Economics,  and  Philosophy  stand  fast  as  permanent  in- 
tellectual interests.  Other  interests  in  rich  abundance  have  been 
found  to  be  essential  to  civilized  man,  and  these  interests  have  been 
placed  side  by  side  with  the  old.  But  the  original  interests  of  aca- 
demic life  have  not  been  displaced.  Indeed,  their  essentialness  for 
man  through  certain  groups  of  students  and  through  certain  voca- 
tions is  better  understood  now  that  compulsion  is  removed.  Further, 
these  subjects  are  better  studied  and  better  taught  in  the  new  atmos- 
phere of  freedom.  Further  still,  the  student  has  become  a  new 
factor  in  his  own  education,  progress  has  become  easier  by  discover- 
ing the  genius  of  the  student,  by  the  earlier  gathering  of  students 


3°4 

of  like  capacities  into  groups,  by  an  ampler  representation  of  essential 
human  interests  in  the  total  body  of  the  graduates  of  the  college. 
Progress  has  been  easier  in  the  college  itself.  It  has  been  drawn, 
as  a  learner  and  servant,  nearer  the  heart  of  the  nation.  It  has  be- 
come the  flexible  instrument  of  the  ever-widening  range  of  great  and 
enduring  human  interests.  Freedom  has  thus  led  to  the  expansion 
and  transformation  of  the  American  university.  Something  like 
this  is  the  result  in  the  sphere  of  faith  under  the  condition  of  freedom. 

The  old  fundamental  interests  of  faith  have  not  been  displaced. 
The  stars  that  the  prisoner  sees  through  his  narrow  and  dim  prison 
windows  are  the  same  stars  that  the  freeman  beholds  gathered  above 
him  in  the  evening  sky.  Arcturus  is  the  same,  Orion  is  the  same, 
the  Pleiades  are  the  same.  What  we  must  note  is  the  disadvantage, 
whether  for  pleasure  or  for  observation,  of  the  prisoner.  God  is 
still  in  his  world,  God  is  still  in  the  great  souls  of  our  race,  he  is 
still  in  the  soul  of  Jesus  Christ,  he  is  still  in  our  humanity.  God  is 
still  in  the  life  of  a  uniquely  religious  race,  in  the  life  of  a  su- 
premely religious  individual,  and  this  monumental  life  recorded  in 
a  monumental  way  is  still  our  Bible.  The  difference  to  be  noted 
here  is  the  immense  advantage  of  the  freeman.  His  approach  to 
these  shining  and  everlasting  realities  of  faith  is  free,  and  he  may 
speak  with  them  face  to  face  as  men  of  old  spake  with  God. 

All  these  ancient  interests  of  faith  are  in  no  way  dishonored. 
They  are  indefinitely  enriched  by  the  inclusion  of  other  great  relig- 
ions in  the  field  of  vision,  by  the  enormous  extension  and  trans- 
formation of  the  outlook  of  the  modern  scholar  in  religion.  These 
discoveries  of  great  religions  and  religions  not  essentially  great,  but 
vital  to  multitudes  of  our  race,  have  issued  in  a  new  sense  of  relig- 
ion as  an  essential  part  of  man's  nature.  Religion  has  thus  ac- 
quired independent  standing  in  human  nature,  and  Christianity  has 
thus  acquired  new  significance  for  the  scientific  intellect  of  the  world. 
We  may  say  to-day  what  could  not  have  been  said  in  an  earlier  day, 
at  least  with  the  same  strength  of  conviction,  that  man  is  the  in- 
terpreter of  nature,  that  religion  is  the  interpreter  of  man,  that 
Christianity  is  the  interpreter  of  religion,  that  God  the  Eternal 
Father  is  the  interpreter  of  Christianity. 

We  are  finding  under  freedom  in  a  surer  way  the  essentialness 
of  the  substance  of  the  old  faith.    The  compulsion  of  tradition  is 


3°5 

done  away,  the  pressure  of  authority  has  been  removed.  We  have 
here  met  infinite  gain.  We  have  substituted  for  an  outward  au- 
thority an  inward  authority.  We  have  replaced  the  compulsions 
of  tradition  by  the  compulsion  of  reality.  We  have  gone  into  a 
great  experimentation:  we  have  found  a  body  of  ideas  rising  out 
of  life  under  God  in  Christ.  These  ideas,  coming  up  out  of  the 
burning  centres  of  religious  souls,  are  not  open  to  question.  They 
come  with  the  force  of  the  inevitable:  they  reveal  themselves  as 
essential  elements  in  the  religion  of  reasonable  beings.  The  process 
is  after  this  manner:  Religion  is  the  life  of  the  soul  under  God. 
Our  religion  is  the  life  of  the  soul  under  the  Christian  God.  It  is 
as  real  as  any  other  part  of  our  existence.  Indeed,  it  is  the  supreme 
reality  in  that  existence,  the  supremely  significant  and  precious 
reality.  Therefore,  while  our  beliefs  may  be  more  or  less  crude, 
while  they  must  be  more  or  less  inadequate,  while  they  are  eternally 
open  to  progress,  they  are  now,  and  they  will  be  forever,  beliefs 
about  reality,  beliefs  freely  formed  and  gained  under  the  benign 
compulsions  of  truth.  Of  this  high  necessity  we  say  with  Words- 
worth: 

"Stern  Lawgiver!  yet  thou  dost  wear 

The  Godhead's  most  benignant  grace; 

Nor  know  we  anything  so  fair 

As  is  the  smile  upon  thy  face." 

We  are  finding  that  the  new  atmosphere  of  freedom  is  the  only 
fitting  atmosphere  for  the  cultivation  of  this  infinite  interest.  What 
the  cloudless  sky  is  to  the  astronomer,  freedom  is  to  the  religious 
thinker  and  the  religious  soul.  In  no  other  atmosphere  can  we 
be  sure  that  we  see  the  objects  of  our  search  and  love.  What  the 
spring  and  summer  days  are  to  the  life  of  nature,  freedom  is  to  the 
life  of  the  spirit.  Only  thus  does  the  seed  become  the  flower,  and 
the  flower  the  fruit.  The  higher  the  human  interest,  the  greater 
must  be  the  demand  for  integrity  in  the  treatment  of  it.  Religion 
involves  man's  life  with  his  kind  and  with  God,  for  time  and  for 
eternity.  Man  should  therefore  be  free  to  live  that  life,  free  to 
think  the  thoughts  that  it  inspires,  free  in  his  whole  treatment  of  it. 
Authority  does  not  necessarily  mean  insincerity;  traditional  com- 
pulsion does  not  certainly  imply  dishonesty,  yet  it  is  favorable  to 
both;  and  insincerity  or  dishonesty  in  the  treatment  of  any  important 


3°6 

interest  is  a  grievous  wrong,  in  the  treatment  of  an  interest  of  su- 
preme importance  it  is  a  calamity.  We  are  here  more  and  more 
afraid  of  the  influences  that  promote  the  holding  of  two  sets  of 
views,  one  set  for  private  use  and  another  set  for  public  use.  We  are 
afraid  of  the  external  tendencies  that  press  conformity  upon  men, 
because  the  truth  may  be  against  this  conformity.  We  have  an 
infinite  interest,  and  we  want  only  honest  men  to  care  for  it,  and  we 
cannot  be  sure  that  men  under  compulsion  are  honest.  We  can 
guard  the  interests  of  industry,  of  government,  of  science,  in  no- 
other  way.  In  all  these  great  interests,  freedom  is  the  only  adequate 
assurance  of  honesty.  In  religion  the  same  principle  holds.  Here 
the  insincere  soul  is  a  plague,  and  we  try  to  discover  this  villain 
of  the  religious  life  by  the  full  blaze  of  freedom. 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  we  are  finding  freedom  to  be  the  con- 
dition of  progress.  Freedom  of  research  in  religion  has  brought  us 
into  a  new  world  of  fact.  There  is  progress  clear,  ample,  significant, 
and  assured.  Freedom  in  the  formation  of  ideas  in  accordance  with 
ascertained  fact  is  another  branch  of  progress.  Freedom  has  led  to 
deeper  insight  into  the  sources  of  religion  in  man,  and  here  is  still 
another  great  gain.  The  greatest  gain  for  the  body  of  ideas  to 
which  we  attach  the  word  "faith"  has  been  in  the  unrestricted  read- 
ing of  the  character  of  God  through  the  mind  and  spirit  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Only  within  a  generation  has  this  freedom  been  fully  and 
generally  enjoyed.  For  more  than  eighteen  hundred  years  the  di- 
vine teaching  of  Jesus  had  been  conditioned  by  writers  of  all  degrees 
of  worth  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  by  all  the  apostolic  utterances 
in  the  New  Testament.  Thus  the  soul  of  Jesus  did  not  in  that 
entire  period  get  a  fair  chance  at  the  human  mind.  Then  men  had 
to  reckon  with  the  great  system  of  Augustine,  consecrated  by  a  vast 
service  and  by  the  practice  of  the  Church  for  a  thousand  years,  re- 
newed by  Luther  and  Calvin  and  Edwards,  and  made  the  classic 
theological  version  of  the  gospel.  This  denial  to  the  mind  of  Jesus 
of  his  rights  has  been  an  immeasurable  misfortune.  The  arrest  of 
progress  has  been  little  less  than  a  calamity.  The  sacrifice  to  the 
fear  of  external  authority  of  the  suppressed  revolt  of  generations  of 
noble  men  and  women  against  the  reigning  scheme,  and  all  the 
precious  insights  and  dreams  that  were  cherished  in  secret  or  aban- 
doned as  impious  by  prophetic  souls,  overawed  and  robbed  of  the 


3°7 

confidence  of  reason,  is  one  of  the  supreme  forms  of  the  immolation 
of  humanity.  The  loss  sustained  by  the  Christian  world  through 
the  reign  of  authority  is  incalculable.  We  revolt  from  constraint 
here  as  from  the  chief  enemy  of  the  human  soul.  We  rejoice  that 
at  last  we  are  able  to  think  of  human  life,  human  history,  and  the 
universe  in  the  freedom  wherewith  Christ  makes  free. 

Among  Americans  freedom  is  fixing  attention  upon  character. 
There  lies  the  problem  of  the  free  world.  The  treasure  of  the  race 
is  to  be  committed  neither  to  authority  nor  to  freedom,  but  to  char- 
acter. We  are  discovering  that  our  one  supreme  evil  in  all  depart- 
ments of  existence  is  irresponsibility.  We  fear  the  wanton  intellect, 
the  thinker  who  is  a  wild  individualist,  who  is  without  the  sense  of 
the  precious  achievements  of  the  past,  who  is  fired  by  ignoble  ambition, 
who  conceals  under  high-sounding  phrases  scorn  for  the  sovereign 
interests  of  man,  who  thinks  and  acts  with  no  appreciation  of  his 
high  accountability  to  life.  We  wish  our  scholar  to  conduct  his  re- 
search under  the  authority  of  an  enlightened  conscience.  We  re- 
quire of  our  statesman  that  he  shall  live  in  the  consciousness  of  the 
preciousness  of  our  political  institutions,  and  their  cost  in  blood  and 
tears  to  the  American  people;  we  ask  of  our  philosophers  high  con- 
sideration for  the  values  and  the  motives  that  are  the  consolation 
and  the  strength  of  human  beings  when  human  beings  are  at  their 
best;  we  demand  of  our  thinkers  in  the  science  of  religion  that  they 
recognize  religion  as  an  independent  and  a  momentous  human  fact; 
that  they  recognize  the  sublimity  of  the  Christian  version  of  that 
fact,  and  that,  while  they  think  in  perfect  freedom,  they  think  in  the 
presence  of  realities  infinitely  greater  than  they,  upon  which  depend 
the  fortunes  of  souls,  the  fortunes  of  mankind.  We  wish  to  remind 
them  that  the  intellectual  Cainite,  the  thinker  who  denies  that  he  is 
his  brother's  keeper,  is  not  a  genuine  freeman,  that  the  Ishmaelite 
in  learning,  whose  chief  distinction  is  that  his  hand  is  against  the 
hand  of  other  scholars,  is  not  the  best  fruit  of  freedom.  Better  a 
conscientious,  conservative  bringing  up  of  the  rear-guard  than  a 
conscienceless  liberal,  regardless  of  previous  battles  and  victories 
of  the  grand  army,  the  larger  part  of  whose  courage  is  not  discretion, 
but  recklessness,  not  homage  to  infinite  interests,  but  the  passion  for 
personal  distinction.  Neither  is  the  type  of  man  called  for  to-day. 
Americans  look  for  the  leader  who  shall  be  equal  to  the  breadth  and 


3o8 

nobility  of  American  freedom,  whose  interest  in  truth  shall  be  a 
moral  interest,  whose  integrity  shall  give  assurance  to  the  multitude 
who  live  and  feel,  but  who,  under  the  stress  of  their  vocations,  can- 
not know,  who  shall  hold  forth  the  hope  to  future  generations  of  a 
mightier  Christianity,  and  who  shall,  by  intellect  and  yet  more  by 
character,  renew  the  divine  program  of  Jesus  Christ,  "I  came  not  to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfil" 


REV.  JOHN  HUNTER,  D.D. 

Glasgow,  Scotland 


REV.  C.  J.  STREET,  M.A„  LL.B. 
Sheffield,  England 


REV.  V.  D.  DAVIS,  B.A. 
London,  England 


REV.  W.  G.  TARRANT,  B.A. 
London,  England 


0"THf    * 

"JMVERSIT 

■'FORNIX 


3°9 


OUR   FREE   CHURCHES    IN  RELATION  TO 
THEOLOGICAL   DEVELOPMENT. 

BY    REV.    WILLIAM    W.    FENN,    DEAN    HARVARD    DIVINITY    SCHOOL, 
CAMBRIDGE,  MASS. 

In  Jesus'  parable  of  the  Talents,  or  the  Pounds,  we  hear  of  a 
servant  who  brought  to  his  lord  that  which  had  been  intrusted  to 
him,  carefully  wrapped  in  a  napkin,  and  said,  Lo,  here  thou  hast 
that  which  is  thine.  It  is  not  a  far-fetched  analogy,  at  least  in  view 
of  the  treatment  usually  accorded  the  parables,  to  see  in  this  unfaith- 
ful steward  the  prototype  of  those  who  regard  the  thought  of  Jesus, 
and  of  the  Scriptures  in  general,  as  a  sacred  deposit  to  be  scrupu- 
lously guarded  and  kept  intact,  neither  increased  nor  diminished, 
nor  even  changed  from  its  original  form.  But,  notwithstanding 
his  apparent  expectation  of  approval,  the  unprofitable  steward, 
who  had  not  dared  to  commit  his  lord's  money  to  the  fortunes  of  the 
market-place,  was  condemned  even  as  those  must  be  who  are  un- 
willing to  trust  their  Lord's  thought  in  the  forum  of  human  thinking. 
Jesus  compared  his  word  to  seed,  and  the  function  of  seed  is  to 
enter  into  fruitful  relations  with  an  environment  at  once  transform- 
ing and  transformed.  In  the  railway  station  of  a  thriving  Massa- 
chusetts town  hangs  a  closed  cabinet  containing  sealed  jars  filled 
with  kernels  of  wheat,  corn,  and  rye,  placed  there  years  ago  to 
illustrate  and  advertise  the  fertility  of  Nebraska  soil.  These  par- 
ticular kernels  have  been  kept  safe,  but  so  they  have  failed  of  their 
appropriate  function  and  missed  their  proper  destiny.  Except  a 
corn  of  wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it  abideth  alone,  but, 
if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit.  The  seed  is  the  word  of  God, 
and  its  mission  is  to  be  transformed  and  to  transform,  to  change  and 
to  grow.  Just  because  the  words  of  Jesus  are  spirit  and  life,  they 
are  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  dead  deposit,  to  be  preserved  unaltered 
in  substance  and  form;  and,  were  we  to  endeavor  so  to  keep  the 
sacred  trust,  we  should  do  despite  to  the  spirit  of  truth  and  deserve 
the  rebuke  visited  upon  the  unfaithful  servant  in  the  parable. 

It  will  be  granted  at  once  that  this  presupposes  a  quite  different 


310 

conception  of  theology,  and  indeed  of  revelation,  from  that  which 
has  prevailed  in  the  Christian  Church.  Ordinarily,  revelation  has 
been  deemed  a  communication  of  ideas  which,  contained  in  Holy 
Scripture,  require  only  to  be  articulated  into  a  coherent  and  sys- 
tematic whole.  Thoroughly  compatible  with  this  view,  if  not 
actually  necessitated  by  it,  is  that  of  a  divinely  constituted  church 
and  a  regular  priesthood,  charged  with  the  interpretation  and  ad- 
ministration of  the  revelation  and  consequently  with  the  construction 
of  a  theological  system.  Plainly,  from  such  a  point  of  view,  free 
churches  are  an  impertinence,  and  progress  in  theology,  save  as  it 
consists  merely  in  a  rearrangement  of  authoritative  data,  is  an  ab- 
surdity. Accepting,  however,  without  present  argument,  the  position 
of  the  free  churches,  and  defining  theology  as  the  interpretation  of 
religious  experience  in  such  a  way  as  to  unify  both  our  experience 
and  our  thought  taken  in  their  totality,  we  see  at  once  that  changes  in 
theology  become  necessary  on  account  of  changes  both  in  thought 
structure  and  in  religious  experience.  When  habits  of  thought 
vary,  when  intellectual  progress  introduces  a  new  point  of  view 
from  which  experience  is  reinterpreted  and  knowledge  is  reorganized, 
there  will  arise  a  demand  for  theological  reconstruction.  It  can 
be  resisted  only  by  the  sacrifice  of  religion;  for,  if  clinging  fondly, 
as  the  heart  naturally  does,  to  endeared  forms,  and  pleading  that 
so  beautiful  a  sentiment  is  its  own  excuse  for  being  and  needs  neither 
interpretation  nor  correlation,  we  separate  religion  from  our  thought 
on  the  one  side  and  from  our  habitual  experience  on  the  other,  the 
ineradicable  human  craving  for  unity  will  either  break  down  the 
arbitrary  barriers  or  leave  the  segregated  sentiment  to  perish  of 
inanition.  Experience  demands  interpretation,  and  the  mind  re- 
quires unity.  An  uninterpreted  and  uncorrelated  religious  sentiment 
means  a  jejune  piety,  whose  end  in  the  second  generation,  if  not  the 
first,  is  to  be  disgraced  and  despised;  for  the  heart  will  not  long 
cherish  what  the  mind  disowns. 

While,  therefore,  changes  in  thought,  due  to  the  advance  of  knowl- 
edge and  the  increase  of  wisdom,  call  for  theological  changes,  a 
similar  demand  arises,  also,  from  the  side  of  religious  experience. 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  theology  always  has  to  wait  for  a  chal- 
lenge from  without.  On  the  contrary,  it  grows  normally  by  its  own 
inherent  life  in  response  to  the  deepening  of  religious  experience. 


3" 

All  experience  is  not  the  same  experience.  The  wider  and  deeper  the 
nature,  the  more  ardent  and  persistent  the  devotion  to  spiritual 
values,  the  richer  becomes  the  experience  and,  consequently,  the 
larger  and  truer  the  thought  which  interprets  it.  From  the  side  of 
religion,  therefore,  comes  an  imperative  summons  to  theological 
progress.  Progressive  theology  is  a  necessity  for  progressive  piety; 
and  man  is  so  constituted  that,  in  view  of  the  changing  conditions 
of  life  and,  most  of  all,  because  of  God's  unceasing  quest  for  deeper 
communion  with  his  children,  a  progressive  piety,  which  means  a 
continuous  response  to  the  ever  more  intimate  drawings  of  God,  is 
essential  to  a  living  piety.  "Nearer,  my  God,  to  thee,"  is  the  march- 
ing song  of  the  children  of  God,  and  God  is  truth  as  well  as  love. 

With  respect  to  the  call  for  religious  progress  coming  from  a 
changed  intellectual  environment,  it  scarcely  needs  to  be  said  that 
of  late  it  has  been  peculiarly  clear  and  urgent.  The  increase  of 
knowledge  in  all  departments  which  has  been  going  on  within  the 
past  half-century,  and  still  continues,  is  literally  unprecedented 
in  extent  and  rapidity;  and  the  change  which  has  been  effected 
consists  not  so  much  in  the  greater  accumulation  of  knowledge  as 
in  the  inculcation  of  new  habits  of  mind.  Manifestly,  such  changes 
as  these,  including  especially  the  work  done  in  the  realms  of  Biblical 
criticism  and  the  history  of  religions,  has  created  a  new  situation 
for  theology.  Nor  must  we  fail  to  add  that  there  has  been  a  marked 
growth  in  religious  life  shown  in  the  keener  sense  of  social  responsi- 
bility and  human  brotherhood.  Thus  both  from  without  and  from 
within  comes  the  inspiring  summons  to  theological  progress.  It 
has  been  responded  to  more  promptly  and  gladly  in  our  free  churches 
than  elsewhere,  for  their  very  freedom  makes  them  peculiarly  respon- 
sive to  changing  conditions  and  more  plastic  to  the  inner  impulse 
of  abundant  life;  but  for  the  same  reason,  because  they  lack  the 
firm  and  stable  character  of  more  compactly  organized  churches, 
they  have  been  more  subject  to  transient  influences  and  liable  to 
temporary  aberrations,  and  therefore  their  curve  of  theological 
movement  presents  a  bewildering  problem  in  the  higher  mathe- 
matics. Time  forbids  detailed  consideration  of  this  fascinating 
history,  and  permits  only  a  more  definite  statement  of  the  way  in 
which  the  general  conditions  of  theological  progress  have  found 
fulfilment  in  our  free  churches. 


312 

It  has  become  a  commonplace  to  say  that  progress  depends  upon 
the  free  rise  of  variations  and  the  proving  of  these  variations  within 
a  critical  environment.  Now  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  these 
conditions  have  existed,  to  a  remarkable  degree,  in  the  polity  of  our 
free  churches,  or,  to  be  specific,  let  me  say  in  our  Congregationalism. 
For  the  two  essential  principles  in  Congregationalism  are  the  com- 
plete independence  of  the  local  church  from  State  or  ecclesiastical 
control  and  the  fellowship  of  the  churches  in  deliberative  conferences 
and  advisory  councils.  By  the  first  of  these  it  is  differentiated  from 
every  form  of  episcopacy,  and  by  the  second  from  unqualified 
independency.  That  the  freedom  of  the  churches  is  favorable  to 
progress,  because  it  permits  the  rise  of  variations  and  sustains  them 
when  they  have  arisen,  is  too  evident  for  proof.  It  is  of  course  true 
that  the  freedom  has  not  been  absolute.  As  in  the  organic  world 
variations  are  within  pretty  definite  limits,  and  a  potato  does  not 
vary  in  the  direction  of  an  oak,  so  there  are  conditions  established 
in  the  nature  of  thought  itself  as  well  as  by  traditional  interests 
and  habits  of  inquiry  which  restrict  intellectual  variations.  But 
the  same  may  be  said  with  respect  to  thought  changes  in  general, 
and  this  normal  restriction,  having  been  thus  recognized,  may 
henceforth  be  ignored.  More  important,  however,  is  the  fact  that, 
where  there  is  no  acknowledged  and  central  ecclesiastical  authority, 
there  is  frequently  a  consensus  of  denominational  opinion  which  is 
quite  as  effective  as  any  pressure  formally  exerted;  and  even  where 
the  past  does  not  control  present  thinking,  through  the  presence  and 
power  of  an  enforced  creed,  there  is  often  a  persuasive,  if  not  a 
coercive,  reverence  for  the  past  which  is  a  potent  influence.  And 
really  this  is  as  it  should  be;  for  no  one  can  sincerely  believe  in  the 
future  progress  of  truth  who  does  not  also  believe  that  the  develop- 
ment of  the  past  has  been  in  the  right  direction,  and  that  the  limits 
which  have  thus  been  set  upon  the  possibilities  of  our  thought  are 
profitable  rather  than  harmful  to  the  growth  in  truth.  Actually, 
therefore,  our  freedom  has  been  not  so  complete  as  might  theo- 
retically appear,  yet  it  may  unhesitatingly  be  said  that  in  our  churches, 
because  of  the  absence  of  external  control,  and  because  of  their 
own  fulness  of  religious  life-giving  plasticity,  there  has  been  an 
altogether  unusual  opportunity  for  the  rise  of  theological  variations. 

For  their  testing,  also,  there  is  good  provision  in  the  Congrega- 


3*3 

tional  polity.  It  should  go  without  saying  that  the  ultimate  criterion 
must  be  the  adaptation  of  any  theological  doctrine  to  the  milieu  of 
human  life  in  its  entirety;  but,  practically,  a  theology  which  meets  the 
needs  of  men  who  are  living  in  ordinary  human  conditions  by  fidelity 
to  their  religious  experience,  on  the  one  hand,  and  harmony  with 
their  general  interpretation  of  experience,  on  the  other,  has  warrant 
of  worth  and  permanence.  In  our  free  churches,  if  a  minister 
open  a  new  vein  of  thought,  present  fresh  theological  ideas,  there 
is  no  power  outside  his  own  church  which  can  suppress  him.  And 
if  he  have  won  the  confidence  of  his  congregation,  which  sees  that 
in  him  these  novelties  of  theological  thought  are  accompanied  by  no 
diminution  of  religious  devotion,  the  church  stands  by  its  minister, 
and  he  continues  to  think  and  speak  in  freedom  until  his  ideas  pass 
into  the  lives  of  his  people,  and  are  tested  by  their  experience.  It 
is  plain  that  the  more  diversified  the  testing  experience,  the  more 
valuable  will  be  its  criticism.  The  experience  of  a  church  means 
more  than  the  experience  of  an  individual.  But  the  sifting  process 
becomes  yet  more  comprehensive.  It  is  not  merely  the  church, 
properly  so  called,  but  the  community  to  which  the  word  comes, 
and  here,  too,  it  is  applied  to  actual  experience.  Moreover,  through 
the  fellowship  of  the  churches  the  new  ideas  find  expression  in 
conferences  and  councils,  through  ministerial  exchanges,  denomina- 
tional papers,  and  in  uncounted  ways.  Manifestly,  all  this  means  a 
searching  criticism  by  a  very  wide  and  diversified  experience.  The 
point  is,  therefore,  that  the  two  constitutive  principles  of  Congrega- 
tionalism meet  theoretically  in  a  quite  remarkable  way  the  conditions 
of  theological  progress. 

If  now  we  turn  from  theory  to  history,  we  shall  find  that,  on  the 
whole,  theoretical  considerations  are  confirmed  by  the  facts,  and 
that  according  to  the  reliance  upon  the  constructive  principles  of 
the  free  churches  has  been  the  rate  and  kind  of  theological  progress. 

For  the  sake  of  definiteness  let  us  confine  ourselves  to  the  history 
of  the  Congregational  order  in  its  two  branches  of  Trinitarian  and 
Unitarian.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  noteworthy  that,  whenever  there 
has  arisen  restiveness  under  theological  changes,  there  has  been  an 
attempt  to  resort  to  some  form  of  ecclesiastical  control,  if  only  to 
a  Presbyterianized  Congregationalism,  usually  urged  in  the  form 
of  consociationism  or  of  increased  power  conferred  upon  ministerial 


3^4 

associations.  That  was  the  case  at  the  beginning  of  both  the  eigh- 
teenth and  the  nineteenth  century:  the  Mathers  in  1705, and  Jedediah 
Morse,  a  century  later,  recognized  the  opportunity  afforded  by  pure 
Congregationalism  for  theological  change,  and  sought  to  interfere 
with  it  by  changing  the  polity  of  the  churches  from  freedom  to 
control.  The  fact  that  those  who  have  been  adverse  to  theological 
change  have  also  been  adverse  to  the  Congregational  polity  is  in- 
structive testimony  to  the  relation  between  the  two. 

Secondly,  where  this  particular  tendency  has  been  discouraged, 
there  has  sometimes  been  an  attempt  to  qualify  freedom,  not  by 
contemporary  ecclesiasticism,  but  by  traditional  creedalism.  The 
history  along  this  line  is  exceedingly  instructive.  At  the  beginning, 
most  of  the  churches  of  New  England  were  constituted  by  ethical 
and  religious  covenant,  and  not  by  theological  creed.  Candidates 
for  membership,  however,  were  obliged  to  present  a  "relation" 
of  spiritual  experience,  usually  containing  also  a  statement  of  belief, 
and  this  was  critically  examined  both  by  the  elders  and  by  the  whole 
church  before  the  candidate  was  received  into  membership.  The 
necessity  of  protecting  their  reputation  abroad  and  their  character 
at  home  soon  led  the  churches  to  formulate  creeds,  which  were, 
however,  at  first  regarded  as  testimonies  rather  than  tests,  the  "rela- 
tion" being  the  decisive  criterion.  Little  by  little  the  "relations" 
were  dispensed  with,  the  question  as  to  the  qualification  of  members 
being  left  to  the  minister  or  to  a  standing  committee,  although  mem- 
bership was  ultimately  dependent  upon  the  vote  of  the  church. 
Along  with  this  in  certain  churches  went  a  tendency  to  make  more 
of  the  formal  statements  of  belief,  and,  when  the  schism  between  the 
Unitarians  and  the  Trinitarians  came  at  the  beginning  of  the  last 
century,  the  latter  emphasized  their  creeds,  making  of  them  avowedly 
tests  instead  of  testimonies.  Thus  the  freedom  of  the  churches  was 
impaired  by  traditionalism,  if  not  by  ecclesiasticism,  and  variations 
of  thought  were  discouraged  and  outlawed.  In  the  Unitarian 
churches,  however,  this  was  not  the  case.  It  is  corroborative  of 
principles  theoretically  set  forth  to  observe  that  in  the  Unitarian 
churches,  which  would  have  no  semblance  of  ecclesiastical  control 
and  refused  to  make  membership  dependent  upon  creedal  acceptance, 
theological  progress  has  been  most  marked,  and,  furthermore,  that 
in  the  Trinitarian  churches  which  have  gone  forward  farther  than 


3i5      ' 

their  fellows  there  has  been  the  most  strenuous  assertion  of  local 
freedom  and  the  greatest  willingness  to  relax  or  alter  the  established 
creed  of  the  church. 

While,  of  the  two  requirements,  the  first,  freedom,  has  been,  on 
the  whole,  well  maintained,  particularly  among  the  Unitarian 
churches,  the  second,  fellowship,  has  been  comparatively  lacking. 
Nor  is  this  surprising;  for,  where  there  is  the  relation  which  fellow- 
ship demands,  there  is  the  ever-present  danger  that  freedom  may 
be  jeopardized.  Consequently,  zeal  for  freedom,  in  its  dread  of 
coercion,  is  prone  to  hold  aloof  even  from  the  fellowship  of  friendliness. 
Therefore,  while  there  has  been  testing  within  the  local  church,  it 
must  be  sorrowfully  confessed  that  thought  variations  have  not 
been  sufficiently  exposed  to  the  judgment  of  a  large  and  diversified 
community. 

Unhappily,  there  came  here  a  separation  of  the  old  Congregational 
order  into  two  divisions,  and  the  feeling  between  them,  imbittered 
also,  more's  the  pity,  by  property  decisions,  kept  them  for  many 
years  in  vigorous  opposition.  To  brand  an  opinion  as  Unitarian 
or  Orthodox  was  at  once  to  discredit  it  in  the  opposite  camp,  and 
prevent  its  receiving  even  so  much  as  a  fair  hearing.  That  this  has 
had  most  grievous  consequences  cannot  be  denied.  It  is  plain  now 
to  thoughtful  men  on  both  sides  that  each  had  something  which  the 
other  lacked,  and  that  the  delimitation  of  the  testing  field  was  of 
utmost  harm.  If  the  churches  could  have  remained  in  fellowship, — 
and,  if  each  had  been  true  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  Congre- 
gationalism as  a  polity,  this  might  easily  have  been  the  case, — 
theological  progress  would  have  been  more  steady  and  even,  with  less 
of  vagary  on  the  one  side  and  of  reluctance  on  the  other.  The 
wider  and  more  diversified  fellowship  of  the  united  churches  would 
have  decided  between  conflicting  opinions  by  the  sure  selective 
process  of  religious  experience. 

In  addition,  in  the  case  of  the  Unitarian  churches,  the  field  was 
still  further  narrowed  by  popular  prejudice  against  them.  It  has 
sometimes  been  made  a  reproach  against  us  that  we  have  had  re- 
ligiously so  little  popular  influence.  To  a  certain  extent  the  com- 
plaint is  just,  and  there  are  many  reasons  for  the  deplorable  fact. 
Not  to  dwell  upon  the  most  obvious, — namely,  that  our  influence 
has  been  through  literature  and  philanthropy  rather  than  through 


316 

strictly  religious  channels,  partly  because  of  a  shrinking  from  what 
was  called  proselyting  and  partly  because  of  the  greater  importance 
assigned  to  the  present  life  with  its  agencies  and  values, — not  to 
dwell  upon  this,  I  say,  it  is  true  that  the  Unitarian  churches  received 
at  the  outset  an  academic  stamp  which  has  militated  against  their 
popular  effectiveness.  But,  besides  this,  it  must  be  said  in  all 
kindness  that  it  ill  becomes  those  who  have  habitually  held  us  up 
to  reproach  as  unchristian  and  irreligious  to  upbraid  us  because  we 
have  accomplished  so  little.  It  is  not  for  those  who  for  years  have 
industriously  circulated  reports  prejudicial  to  a  man's  good  name 
to  urge  at  last,  in  vindication  of  the  slanders,  that  during  all  these 
years  he  has  failed  to  win  popular  approval.  But,  to  whatever  cause 
it  may  be  attributed,  the  fact  is  that  we  have  not  been  a  church  of 
the  people  practically  as  we  have  been  theoretically,  and  that  our 
developing  theology  has  suffered  because,  while  in  the  main  it  has 
kept  in  harmony  with  contemporary,  scientific,  and  philosophical 
thought,  it  has  lacked  the  wholesome  criticism  which  common 
human  experience  alone  can  give.  But  this  again  means  that,  in 
so  far  as  theology  has  thus  suffered,  it  has  been  because  the  principle 
of  fellowship  has  been  sacrificed. 

My  time  has  almost  expired,  and  I  can  give  no  further  illustrations 
of  the  principle.  The  argument  has  been  that  theological  progress 
demands  both  freedom  and  fellowship,  the  free  rise  of  variations  and 
the  wide  criticism  of  them  in  the  largest  possible  field  of  experience, 
and  also  that  the  polity  of  our  free  churches  theoretically  meets 
these  conditions  most  satisfactorily.  In  actual  practice  we  have 
kept  freedom,  but  at  the  expense  of  fellowship.  And,  although 
any  change  which  should  imperil  our  freedom  for  the  sake  of  a 
visible  and  material  prosperity  would  be  deprecated  by  all  who  trust 
the  free  life  of  God  in  the  souls  of  men,  those  who  believe  in  and 
hope  for  theological  progress  welcome  the  signs  of  a  wider  fellowship, 
which  appear  in  the  increasing  friendliness  among  denominations, 
and,  most  of  all,  in  the  presence  of  the  great  Council  which  is  to 
assemble  to-morrow.  But  our  hope  sweeps  wider  yet,  even  to  a 
time  when  the  spirit  shall  determine  the  body,  and  those  in  whom 
reigns  the  spirit  that  was  in  Jesus  Christ  shall  be  one  fellowship, 
moving  unitedly  in  mutual  confidence  and  love  toward  the  perfect 
truth. 


3^7 


THE   SEPARATION   OF   CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

BY  HON.  MARCUS   P.  KNOWLTON,  CHIEF  JUSTICE   OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 

Religious  feeling — I  might  almost  say  the  religious  instinct  in 
human  nature — is  well-nigh  universal.  From  the  earliest  times  it  has 
been  a  vital  force  in  civil  government.  Sometimes  a  religious  en- 
thusiast, wearing  a  crown,  has  attempted  to  control  the  religious 
opinions  of  his  subjects  for  their  eternal  good.  Sometimes  an  un- 
scrupulous ruler  has  played  upon  the  religious  sentiments  of  his 
people  for  his  own  aggrandizement.  Sometimes,  as  in  this  country, 
a  state,  by  giving  religious  freedom  to  the  individual,  has  laid  a  firm 
foundation  for  the  upbuilding  of  national  integrity. 

As  government  in  its  widest  scope  deals  with  all  matters  of  general 
concern  to  the  body  politic,  it  cannot  ignore  religious  interests.  A 
state  may  simply  allow  churches  to  hold  property  as  corporate  bodies 
and  to  conduct  worship  as  they  choose.  It  may  go  further,  and  in- 
terfere to  regulate  the  use  of  this  property  or  to  put  restrictions  upon 
it.  It  may  establish  a  church,  or  give  property  to  a  church,  or  enter 
into  an  alliance  with  it.  It  may  even  constitute  itself  the  church,  or, 
as  the  supreme  ruler,  become  the  final  judge  of  conditions  in  the 
church. 

The  government  of  the  Jews  was  a  theocracy  which,  from  first  to 
last,  showed  the  closest  possible  union  of  Church  and  State.  Their 
expected  Messiah  was  to  be  among  nations  a  great  temporal  ruler, 
the  King  of  kings;  and  in  the  higher  spiritual  realm  he  was  to  be 
worshipped  as  the  Lord  of  lords. 

The  union  of  Church  and  State  among  Christians  dates  from  the 
conversion  of  the  Emperor  Constantine  in  the  fourth  century.  At 
that  time  the  ecclesiastical  power  and  the  temporal  power  began  to 
work  together  through  the  same  agents,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the 
tenth  century  they  seemed  to  form  a  perfect  union.  The  ecclesias- 
tical power  as  a  controlling  force  in  civil  government  reached  its 


3f» 

culmination  before  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century.  Afterward,  for 
four  centuries,  the  Church  seemed  outwardly  to  be  strengthening  its 
position  in  this  respect;  but  it  was,  in  fact,  through  the  silent  work- 
ing of  spiritual  forces,  shaping  forms  of  human  freedom.  Protest- 
antism gave  new  life  to  the  Christian  Church,  and  sent  out  a  call  for 
religious  independence.  The  Elizabethan  era  was  a  time  of  great 
expansion  in  different  fields,  intellectual,  social,  and  religious.  The 
growth  of  Puritanism  and  the  establishment  of  the  republic  under 
Cromwell  separated  the  State  from  the  Established  Church  in  Eng- 
land. But  the  new  conditions  were  only  temporary,  and  the  Res- 
toration gave  back  to  the  king  the  ecclesiastical  control  which  had 
been  held  by  his  predecessors. 

The  emigrants  to  New  England  were  representatives  of  the  new 
thought,  and  they  were  willing  to  suffer  much  for  the  sake  of  relig- 
ious freedom.  As  founders  of  churches  in  the  wilderness,  they  estab- 
lished no  ecclesiastical  connection  with  the  churches  of  the  mother- 
land: still  less,  in  that  relation,  did  they  recognize  dependence  upon 
the  civil  government.  They  created  a  system  of  their  own,  under 
the  authority  of  the  royal  charters,  whereby  they  maintained  govern- 
ments founded  on  principles  of  civil  liberty,  and  at  the  same  time 
established  churches  for  worship  according  to  their  conception  of 
religious  duty.  In  the  different  colonies  the  rules  and  requirements 
for  participation  in  the  making  of  laws  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  re- 
ligious privileges  were  not  the  same,  although  in  their  leading  feat- 
ures they  had  much  in  common.  Under  the  original  charter  of 
Massachusetts  Bay  the  political  power  was  early  vested  in  those  in- 
habitants who  were  called  freemen.  An  early  order  of  the  Council 
was  in  these  words:  "Henceforth  no  man  shall  be  admitted  to  the 
freemen  of  this  commonwealth  but  such  as  are  members  of  some  of 
the  churches  within  this  jurisdiction."  In  1663  an  order  was  adopted 
that  persons  who  refused  to  attend  upon  public  worship  should  be 
incapable  of  voting.  There  was  also  a  requirement  that  all  persons 
should  contribute  for  the  support  of  public  worship,  and  be  taxed  in 
default  of  contribution. 

Our  forefathers  were  distinctively  a  religious  people,  and  in  general 
they  agreed  in  their  fundamental  religious  opinions.  The  strength 
of  their  convictions  and  the  intensity  of  their  feelings  made  them 
intolerant  of  conflicting  views.   They  lived  in  an  age  of  intolerance. 


3i9 

The  institutions  of  England  were  organized  to  maintain  and  perpet- 
uate a  state  church.  Roman  Catholics  and  Quakers  residing  in 
England,  and  other  disturbers  of  the  established  order,  were  made 
the  subjects  of  persecution.  The  colonists  brought  with  them  the 
spirit  of  the  mother  country.  Laws  were  passed  banishing  Roman 
Catholics  and  Quakers  from  the  colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay. 
Baptists  were  treated  a  little  less  severely;  but  proscription  of  them 
drove  Roger  Williams  and  his  associates  to  Rhode  Island,  where 
they  made  that  colony  a  place  of  refuge  for  independent  thinkers. 
The  strength  of  Puritanism  in  the  colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay 
made  it  the  stronghold  of  conformity  to  the  doctrinal  standards  of 
New  England.  In  the  other  New  England  colonies  conditions  were 
similar,  although  in  none  of  them  were  the  qualifications  of  voters 
determined  by  a  religious  test. 

In  Massachusetts  the  original  requirement  of  taxation  of  all  the 
people  for  the  maintenance  of  the  established  churches  was  modified 
as  to  Quakers  in  1 731,  as  to  Baptists  in  1734,  and  as  to  members 
of  the  Church  of  England  in  1742,  by  the  enactment  of  laws  which 
exempted  from  liability  those  who  were  conscientiously  opposed  to 
paying  taxes  for  the  support  of  the  regularly  established  churches 
and  who  were  accustomed  to  worship  with  a  specified  one  of  these 
other  denominations.  These  statutes  were  first  enacted  for  short 
terms  of  years,  and  were  renewed  from  time  to  time  until  1833,  when 
general  taxation  for  the  support  of  churches  in  Massachusetts  was 
abolished. 

I  have  referred  to  these  features  of  the  early  history  of  New  Eng- 
land because  the  great  influence  of  this  part  of  the  country  upon  the 
religious  thought  and  the  governmental  policy  of  the  Central  and 
Western  States  has  been  everywhere  recognized.  To  a  large  degree 
similar  causes  were  operative  from  the  beginning  to  produce  similar 
although  slightly  different  conditions  in  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and 
Pennsylvania. 

The  framers  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  concluded 
its  Sixth  Article  with  these  words:  "No  religious  test  shall  ever  be 
required  as  a  qualification  to  any  office  of  public  trust  under  the 
United  States."  The  first  article  of  the  amendments  to  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  begins  as  follows:  "Congress  shall  make 
no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion  or  prohibiting  the 


320 

free  exercise  thereof."  It  is  therefore  impossible  for  the  nation,  under 
our  organic  law,  to  create  or  recognize  an  established  church  or  to 
interfere  with  the  religious  freedom  of  any  citizen. 

This  constitutional  provision  is  by  no  means  an  implication  that 
religion  is  not  a  reality  or  that  it  is  unimportant.  It  is  simply  the 
strongest  possible  declaration  that  this  is  a  country  of  absolute  free- 
dom in  religious  thought  and  religious  worship  so  long  as  there  is  no 
violation  of  moral  and  social  regulations.  In  the  constitution  of 
Massachusetts  and  in  that  of  some  of  the  other  States  there  is  direct 
recognition  of  the  importance  of  religion  as  the  foundation  on  which 
good  government  rests.  In  Article  II.  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights 
in  this  constitution  the  thought  is  expressed  in  these  words:  "It  is 
the  right  as  well  as  the  duty  of  all  men  in  society  publicly,  and  at 
stated  seasons,  to  worship  the  Supreme  Being,  the  great  Creator  and 
Preserver  of  the  universe.  And  no  subject  shall  be  hurt,  molested, 
or  restrained  in  his  person,  liberty,  or  estate  for  worshipping  God  in 
the  manner  and  season  most  agreeable  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  con- 
science, or  for  his  religious  profession  of  sentiment,  provided  he  doth 
not  disturb  the  public  peace  or  obstruct  others  in  their  religious 
worship."  We  see,  therefore,  that  our  constitutions,  State  and 
national,  recognize  religion,  but  adopt  no  particular  form  of  it. 
When  legislative  assemblies  or  sessions  of  courts  are  opened  with 
prayer,  a  Christian  minister  usually  officiates,  because  this  is  a 
Christian  nation  in  the  sense  that  most  of  the  people  have  relations 
more  or  less  close  with  some  branch  of  the  Christian  Church.  If  it 
were  conceivable  that  a  majority  of  the  people  may  hereafter  believe 
that  some  other  religion  expresses  more  truly  the  relations  of  man  to 
his  Creator  than  the  Christian  religion,  there  would  be  nothing  in 
our  constitution  to  prevent  the  abolition  or  modification  of  any  re- 
ligious ceremony  observed  by  a  department  of  the  government  in 
connection  with  the  performance  of  its  public  duties.  If  the  Senate 
of  the  United  States  should  invite  a  distinguished  Jewish  rabbi  or 
Hindu  sage  to  open  one  of  its  daily  sessions  with  prayer  in  place  of 
its  revered  chaplain,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  it  would  not 
thereby  violate  any  principle  of  our  government. 

The  perfect  independence  of  all  our  churches  and  the  indepen- 
dence of  our  civil  government  in  its  relations  to  the  churches  are  a 
development  of  our  system  which  was  hardly  thought  of  in  the  early 


321 

days  of  the  colonies.  It  follows  from  an  application  of  principles  of 
liberty  which  were  planted  deep  in  the  hearts  of  our  ancestors  when 
they  sought  the  inhospitable  shores  of  New  England.  Freedom  to 
worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences  was 
the  most  fundamental  and  inspiring  of  the  motives  that  gave  strength 
and  vigor  and  courage  and  perseverance  to  the  Pilgrims  and  Puritans 
who  laid  the  foundations  of  our  State.  Free  speech,  a  free  press, 
freedom  to  make  laws  and  to  choose  rulers, — all  these  were  included 
in  their  hope  for  the  future,  to  be  enjoyed  to  the  full  when  civiliza- 
tion should  be  developed  to  their  ideal.  But  these  were  only  se- 
quences to  that  freedom  in  religion  which  was  their  support  and 
consolation. 

The  intolerance  of  the  little  communities  during  the  early  years  in 
New  England  was  without  much  consciousness  of  its  purport.  The 
proprietors  had  established  their  habitations  as  homes  of  religious 
liberty;  and,  in  their  confidence  in  the  truth  of  their  doctrines  and  in 
their  revolt  from  the  seeming  worldliness  of  the  Church  of  England, 
they  forgot  that  others  might  conscientiously  differ  from  them  as  they 
differed  from  the  members  of  the  Established  Church.  But  they 
had  planted  the  seed  of  true  reform.  Liberty  of  conscience  was  at 
the  heart's  core  of  their  movement,  even  if  they  knew  it  not.  With 
the  advancing  years  it  gave  color  to  their  system,  and  became  its 
most  striking  feature.  Now  its  dominion  in  the  homes  and  among 
the  people  of  the  United  States  is  absolute.  In  a  free  representative 
government  it  is  necessarily  inherent.  The  continuance  of  its  ex- 
istence in  the  future  as  a  vitalizing  principle  in  our  republic  cannot 
reasonably  be  questioned.  It  has  come  with  the  advancement  of  the 
people  in  education  and  civilization,  and  it  is  a  natural  accompanist 
of  this  advancement.  That  its  effect  has  been  beneficial,  and  will  be 
beneficial  hereafter,  follows  logically  from  its  relation  to  all  that 
makes  for  human  progress. 

A  study  of  the  practical  workings  of  the  American  system,  in  com- 
parison with  that  in  England,  will  confirm  our  conclusions.  The 
relations  of  Church  and  State  in  England  have  been  much  considered 
by  the  best  thinkers  for  more  than  a  generation.  Incidentally  to 
other  subjects  they  have  been  considered  for  more  than  three  cen- 
turies. While  disestablishment  and  disendowment  have  been  op- 
posed by  conservatives,  they  have  found  many  supporters  in  the 


322 

Established  Church  as  well  as  outside  of  it.  Devout  men  have  be- 
wailed the  paralyzing  effect  of  State  control  upon  spiritual  life. 
Frederic  Harrison  likens  the  spiritual  method  in  the  Church  to  a 
mother  teaching  her  children  to  love  her,  while  the  secular  method 
reminds  him  of  a  drill  sergeant  teaching  recruits  to  march.  The 
stagnation  of  a  church  in  corporate  union  with  the  State  is  undeniable. 
While  the  State  looks  to  the  world  for  its  standards,  a  true  church 
looks  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus.  In  the  work  of  the  State  we  see  the 
methods  of  politicians,  while  religious  fervor  begets  the  methods  of 
spiritual  teachers.  The  former  methods  paralyze  a  church,  while 
the  latter  vitalize  and  invigorate  it. 

Many  Churchmen  in  England  utterly  repudiate  the  illegitimate 
influence  gained  for  the  Church  in  the  political  world  by  enormous 
endowments,  State  monopoly,  and  artificial  supremacy.  They 
grieve  over  the  political  abuses  connected  with  the  traffic  in  livings 
and  other  ecclesiastical  preferments.  A  distinguished  Englishman 
in  a  spirited  address  arraigned  the  system  in  part  as  follows:  "Is 
not  an  official  religion  a  thing  vicious  in  principle  ?  Is  it  not  grow- 
ing each  day  more  alien  to  modern  policy  ?  Is  not  an  establishment, 
a  political  order  within  a  religious  institution,  the  invention  of  an  age 
of  unscrupulous  politicians  and  political  priests?  Can  we  not  read 
its  doom  written  in  every  page  of  our  new  religious  expansion  ?  Can 
we  not  hear  its  buttresses  crack  and  shiver  under  the  swelling  of  spirit 
within,  the  stir  and  battle  of  life  without  it  ?  Does  it  not  add  a  new 
bitterness,  a  fresh  entanglement,  to  many  a  political  contest,  making 
all  education  a  field  of  contention,  turning  social  problems  into  sec- 
tarian struggles,  needlessly  filling  with  embarrassment  the  tasks  of 
imperial  government?  Are  not  statesmen  growing  weary  of  this 
useless  burden  of  political  difficulties  ?  Are  not  Churchmen  growing 
weary  of  the  humiliating  dependence?  How  long  will  they  endure 
to  see  religious  life  thus  vulgarized  by  a  compact  which  forces  devo- 
tion into  the  attitude  of  a  parasite,  and  turns  the  voice  of  the  preacher 
into  the  grating  tone  of  a  State  official  ?  " 

The  benumbing  effect  of  political  control  upon  the  spiritual  life  of 
the  Church  is  not  the  only  ground  of  complaint  among  Churchmen  in 
England.  Men  quite  different  from  him  whose  words  I  have  just 
quoted  insist  that  the  government  is  unfair  to  the  Church  in  depriv- 
ing it  of  authority  in  ecclesiastical  matters  and  subjecting  it  to  the 


323 

decisions  of  the  secular  courts.  They  feel  that  the  successors  of  the 
dignitaries  of  the  former  ecclesiastical  tribunals  have  no  judicial 
power.  Of  course,  non-conformists  of  different  sects  have  long  been 
contending  for  recognition  and  denouncing  the  injustice  that  has 
deprived  them  of  their  rights. 

The  evils  which  some  Churchmen  have  anticipated  from  a  separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State  have  not  been  felt  in  America.  It  has  been 
feared  that  without  the  establishment  the  poor  neighborhoods  would 
have  no  proper  provision  for  religious  worship.  Experience  in 
America  has  shown  the  groundlessness  of  this  fear.  Nowhere  else 
in  the  world  has  the  missionary  spirit  been  so  effective  as  in  America. 
Most  zealously  has  provision  been  made  for  bringing  religious  teach- 
ing to  small  and  poor  towns  and  to  remote  parts  of  our  country. 
It  has  been  suggested  that,  without  governmental  regulation,  rivalry 
among  sects  and  jealousy  of  one  another  would  bring  denominations 
into  mutual  hostility.  This  evil  has  not  been  prevalent  in  this  country, 
but  the  tendencies  have  been  more  and  more  toward  unity  of  effort 
in  Christian  work. 

Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  has  there  been  any  lack  of  independence 
and  self-reliance  when  denominational  action  has  been  called  for. 
The  growth  of  particular  sects  from  the  inspiration  of  their  own 
conception  of  religious  truth  has  sometimes  been  phenomenal. 
Under  freedom  every  kind  of  religion  helpful  to  the  community  may 
grow  and  thrive.  After  the  Revolution  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  this  country  was  very  feeble.  Its  membership  was  small, 
it  was  surrounded  by  other  organizations  antagonistic  to  its  doc- 
trines and  forms  of  worship,  and  it  bore  the  odium  of  its  former 
connection  with  the  mother  country.  But  from  its  inherent  vitality 
it  has  grown  to  great  prominence  in  America.  The  astonishing 
growth  of  Roman  Catholicism  has  not  come  from  immigration  alone, 
but  in  great  part  from  the  retention  of  the  descendants  of  immigrants 
within  the  Church.  Other  prosperous  denominations  might  be 
mentioned,  and  of  them  all  it  should  be  said  that  their  health  and 
strength  depend  not  upon  adventitious  aids,  but  upon  their  own 
vitality. 

In  this  country  and  elsewhere  the  movement  for  religious  freedom 
has  gone  hand  in  hand  with  the  progress  of  civil  liberty.  In  England 
the  rights  of  dissenters  have  been  enlarged  from  time  to  time,  until 


324 

now  there  is  little  to  prevent  disestablishment  but  the  practical  diffi- 
culties involved  in  disendowment.  Roman  Catholics  and  Jews  may 
sit  in  Parliament.  The  University  of  Oxford  has  been  opened  to 
dissenters  by  the  passage  of  the  University  Test  Act,  and  this  has 
been  supplemented  by  the  act  for  the  removal  of  ecclesiastical  re- 
strictions in  the  university.  The  ministry  has  lately  been  making  a 
great  effort  to  relieve  the  schools  of  all  connection  with  the  Established 
Church.  This  effort  met  defeat  in  the  House  of  Lords,  but  it  will 
quickly  be  renewed. 

In  Germany,  since  1850,  Roman  Catholics  have  enjoyed  almost 
entire  independence.  The  union,  many  years  later,  of  the  Lutheran 
and  Reformed  communities  into  the  "United  Evangelical  Church  of 
Prussia"  was  intended  to  create  a  favored  organization ;  but  it  left 
this  Church  in  too  close  an  alliance  with  the  State.  With  the  pope 
of  Rome  a  self-restrained  prisoner  in  the  Vatican,  the  ecclesiastical 
thraldom  of  Italy  no  longer  includes  the  civil  power.  France  has 
lately  been  struggling,  even  to  the  great  peril  of  the  public  peace,  to 
establish  the  independence  of  both  parties  in  the  relations  between 
the  Church  and  the  State. 

Viewing  this  strain  and  stress  in  other  lands,  our  country  sits 
serene  in  the  consciousness  that  here  there  is  perfect  freedom  in  re- 
ligious life.  Of  the  many  blessings  of  a  free  government  we  deem 
this  the  choicest.  Our  fathers  obtained  it  through  toil  and  privation, 
in  an  unyielding  determination  to  achieve  so  much  of  independence 
at  whatever  cost.  Their  children  will  cherish  it  as  a  precious  leg- 
acy, whose  possession  suggests  the  development  of  an  ideal  national 
life. 

Note. — In  this  connection  may  be  read  the  article  "Church  and  State  in  America,"  in 
the  Proceedings  of  the  First  Congress,  in  London,  igoi. 


325 


THE   LIBERAL   OUTLOOK. 

BY  REV.  PAUL  REVERE  FROTHINGHAM,   OF   BOSTON. 

The  occasion  which  has  summoned  us  together  and  the  circum- 
stances under  which  we  meet  encourage  us  to  look  with  care,  if 
somewhat  briefly  and  in  haste,  at  the  larger  implications  of  our 
message  and  the  deeper  obligations  of  our  faith.  The  Liberal 
Outlook, — what  is  it  at  the  present  time  ?  What  promise  is  there 
of  our  cause  to  flourish  ?  What  duties  have  we  to  discharge,  what 
functions  to  fulfil,  what  work  as  yet  undone,  which  waits  us  to  per- 
form it  and  perfect? 

I  face  the  subject  with  the  greater  gladness,  for  there  are  certain 
things  of  definite  and,  I  think,  of  pressing  moment,  which  I  wish 
to  call  attention  to  and  urge.  The  time  has  come,  it  seems  to  me, 
for  liberal  thinkers  to  strike  a  note  of  deeper  and  more  spiritual 
value,  and  to  do  a  work  of  more  constructive  and  religious  import 
than  has  ever  wakened  our  enthusiasm  in  the  past.  Our  defects 
thus  far,  if  I  may  speak  of  them  as  such,  have  been,  as  often  happens 
in  this  world,  the  defects  of  our  very  qualities.  Our  weakness  has 
resulted  from  our  strength.  Our  faith  has  suffered  at  the  hands  of 
reason;  and  we  have  failed*  too  much  of  late  to  take  account  of 
those  elements  in  religion  which  are  deeper  than  all  the  definitions 
of  the  mind  and  all  the  searchings  of  the  intellect. 

It  would,  I  suppose,  be  pretty  heartily  agreed  that  a  thing  we 
definitely  stand  for  is  the  need  and  value  of  clear  and  rational  thought 
upon  religious  matters.  We  have  always  emphasized,  and  often 
well  exemplified,  the  power  and  glory  of  plain,  decisive,  honest  think- 
ing,— not  holding  on  to  beliefs  because  they  are  beautiful  or  help- 
ful or  hallowed  by  a  long  tradition,  but  asking  only,  Are  they  true  ? 
Thus  we  often  speak  of  ourselves  not  as  liberal  believers,  nor  lib- 
eral worshippers,  nor  liberal  churchmen,  nor  as  liberal  religionists, 
even,  but  as  liberal  thinkers.    The  very  name,  indeed,  of  this  Inter- 


326 

national  Council,  which  has  come  together,  is  instructive  and  sig- 
nificant. It  is  the  "Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Re- 
ligious Thinkers  and  Workers." 

In  other  words,  we  make  the  Truth,  as  the  intellect  perceives  it, 
our  one  supreme  desire.  We  agree  to  stand  or  fall  by  what  appear, 
or  are  proved  to  be,  the  facts.  We  do  not  care  for  any  set  expression 
of  a  truth  so  much  as  we  do  for  the  truth  itself.  Like  Matthew 
Arnold,  we  can  say, 

"For  vigorous  teachers  seized  my  youth 

And  purged  its  faith,  and  trimmed  its  fire, 
Showed  me  the  high,  white  star  of  truth; 
There  bade  me  gaze,  and  there  aspire." 

And  all  of  this,  let  me  hasten  to  say  at  once,  is  well.  It  is  still 
needed  at  the  present  time.  There  is  none  too  much  of  it  among 
religious  bodies  and  believers.  The  Church  as  a  whole, — there  are 
great  and  noble  exceptions  of  course,  and  they  must  never  be  for- 
gotten,— but  the  Church  as  a  whole,  when  account  is  taken  of  all  its 
various  branches,  does  not  seem  to  be  so  much  interested  in  what 
is  true  as  it  does  in  what  may  still  be  clung  to  as  if  it  were  true. 
It  is  not  in  the  position  of  one  who  is  eagerly  searching  for  the  truth; 
but  it  is  in  the  position  of  having  certain  facts  thrust  upon  its  atten- 
tion, and  of  being  told  that  it  must  not  any  longer  ignore  them.  The 
"children  of  the  world"  in  this  respect,  if  they  are  not  wiser  than 
the  children  of  the  light,  are  much  more  scientific.  They  are  modern 
and  not  mediaeval. 

There  is  need,  therefore,  I  repeat,  and  ample  room,  for  insist- 
ence upon  clear  and  vigorous  thought  in  matters  of  religion.  The 
battle  has  not  yet  been  won  for  a  pure  religion  which  is  fervent  as 
well  as  rational.  A  thing,  however,  that  as  liberals  in  religion  we 
too  often  have  forgotten  is  distinctly  this, — that  a  vast  amount  of 
religious  impulse  and  spiritual  consciousness  exists  which  never 
can  be  brought  within  the  range  of  what  the  human  mind  can  find 
out  to  perfection.  The  deepest  things  in  the  world  are  those  which 
are  nearest  to  us,  and  those  which  least  can  be  defined  are  the  most 
essential  and  instinctive.  Moreover,  it  is  just  when  thought  grows 
weary,  and  when  her  sturdy  pinions,  once  so  active  and  efficient, 
begin  to  beat  in  vain  the  rare  and  sublimated  ether  of  the  spirit, — 


327 

it  is  then  that  the  other  faculties  of  life  push  boldly  on,  then  that 
feeling  and  imagination  seek  the  dazzling  source  of  light  itself,  and 
dare  to  trust  where  vision  is  denied.  Religion,  in  other  words,  is 
•deeper  than  any  of  the  explanations  and  the  definitions  of  religion,  and 
faith  outsoars  the  farthest  reaches  of  philosophy. 

This  does  not  mean,  however,  that  faith  is  the  necessary  foe  of 
reason.  Not  at  all !  It  very  often  is  its  friend  and  helper.  When 
the  two  do  not  agree,  it  is  frequently  because  the  more  spiritual 
faculty  has  gone  boldly  on  ahead,  and  occupies  with  confidence  a 
high  and  far  position  which  reason  only  later  will  attain.  If  we 
may  not,  therefore,  distrust  our  powers  of  thought,  we  often  are 
obliged  to  confess  their  painful  limitations.  "Thus,"  as  a  writer 
has  well  said,  "there  must  lie  in  all  reasoning  men's  minds  a  streak 
of  agnosticism.  The  triumph  of  faith  can  never,  until  faith  melts 
into  certainty,  be  of  the  same  quality  as  the  triumph  of  reason,  and 
it  is  upon  the  proportion  of  doubt  to  faith  in  any  man's  mind  that 
his  religious  attitude  depends."  For  "Religion,  in  its  purest  form, 
is  not  a  solution  of  the  world's  mystery,  but  a  working  theory  of 
morals,"  and  a  creed  is  "only  a  desperate  human  attempt  to  state 
a  mystery  which  cannot  be  stated,  in  a  world  where  all  is  dark." 

The  inadequacy  of  thought,  however,  to  be  our  sole  reliance  in 
matters  of  religion,  is  less  the  point  on  which  I  wish  to  lay  my  em- 
phasis than  its  over-great  sufficiency  to  waken  differences  and  divide 
men  into  sects  and  schools.  Religion,  as  I  just  have  said,  is  a  deeper, 
grander,  more  inclusive  thing  than  any  or  than  all  the  explanations 
of  religion  and  the  theories  about  its  nature.  Moreover,  it  is  when 
we  attempt  to  explain  it  fully,  and  to  dogmatize  about  it,  that  dif- 
ferences rise  and  difficulties  gather.  You  can  never  expect  people 
to  unite  upon  a  definition  of  something  which  is  practically  inde- 
finable. Thus  it  happens  that  the  religious  thinkers  of  the  world 
too  often  have  succeeded  in  confusing  the  religious  workers  and 
believers.  Theologies  have  rested  like  a  dull  and  heavy  weight 
upon  the  breast  of  religious  hope  and  trust.  They  have  checked  the 
natural  breathings  of  the  spirit,  if  they  have  not  even  stifled  and 
suppressed  them.  Excessive  emphasis  upon  the  thought-element 
in  religion,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  dictates  of  the  spirit  and  the  instincts 
of  the  feelings,  not  only  acts  to  multiply  religious  sects  and  to  mag- 
nify religious  differences,  but  to  minimize  religious  life  and  even  to 


328 

repress  religious  feelings.  It  is  the  tendency  of  the  reason  to  make 
religion  "a  theory  for  the  understanding  rather  than  a  life  for  the 
soul." 

You  see,  therefore,  the  point  at  which  I  have  been  aiming  and 
where  at  length  we  have  arrived.  The  liberal  outlook  should  be 
an  outlook  of  the  spirit,  and  the  thing  that  we  are  called  upon  to 
emphasize  is  a  new  interpretation  of  those  great  realities  of  faith 
which  are  deeper,  higher,  broader,  more  inclusive  and  enduring 
than  all  the  "letters"  which  would  kill  and  the  dogmas  that  divide. 
What  we  need  at  the  present  time,  and  what  we  may  confidently 
look  to  see  developed,  is  the  spiritual  mind,  the  spiritual  way  of 
looking  at  religion  and  interpreting  the  Christian  faith.  There  has 
been  too  much  theology  and  not  enough  religion  in  the  past,  too 
much  talk  about  the  differences  of  dogma  and  too  little  stress  upon 
the  unities  of  worship.  What  the  world  is  waiting  for  is  less  em- 
phasis upon  the  things  which  cannot  be  believed  and  more  insist- 
ence upon  the  things  which  never  can  be  doubted. 

Moreover,  this  spiritual  view  of  things,  as  distinct  from  what  is 
purely  intellectual  or  essentially  dogmatic,  is  the  true  inheritance 
and  the  rightful  mission  of  the  liberal  faith.  It  was  this  that  was 
the  glory  of  the  fathers  of  our  movement,  and  the  thing  which  causes 
them  to  be  so  well  remembered.  "The  very  essence  of  the  liberal 
movement"  under  Channing  and  others,  if  I  may  quote  the  words 
of  so  clear  an  interpreter  as  the  late  John  Chadwick,  was  "to  em- 
phasize the  ethical  and  spiritual,  and  to  treat  theological  dogmas 
as  negligible  quantities."  A  generation  later  came  the  word  of 
Starr  King  upon  "Spiritual  Christianity"  ;  and  no  deeper,  truer, 
or  more  helpful  word  has  since  been  spoken  on  this  most  important 
theme.  It  was  the  glory  of  King  to  declare  and  make  forever  clear 
that  there  are  truths  of  the  personal  soul  in  relation  to  the  God  of 
all  which  are  vastly  more  important  to  religion  than  all  the  articles 
of  so-called  faith  and  the  arguments  of  valiant  reason. 

But  I  have  no  wish  to-day  to  argue  in  this  presence  for  this  deeper 
and  more  spiritual  point  of  view  in  matters  of  religion.  I  would 
rather  plead  with  earnestness  for  what  the  spiritual  point  of  view  will 
lead  to  and  result  in.  For  genuine  unity  can  only  come  through 
genuine  spirituality.  Fellowship  of  the  spirit  is  the  only  fellowship 
that  ever  can  be  made  effective,  because  supremely  natural.     It  is 


329 

the  function  of  the  intellect  to  divide  and  make  distinctions:  it  is 
the  mission  of  the  spirit  to  unite  and  make  us  all  as  one.  In  our 
thoughts  of  God,  for  instance,  in  our  understanding  of  the  life  and 
teachings  of  the  Master,  we  here,  though  liberal  thinkers,  are 
more  or  less  divided.  In  our  consciousness  of  God,  however,  and 
our  reverence  for  the  character  of  Christ  we  are  as  one.  When  we 
begin  to  define  things,  we  fall  inevitably  apart;  but,  when  we  face 
the  eternal  mysteries  which  can  never  be  defined,  then  the  differences 
fade  away,  and  we  feel  the  touch  that  binds  us  all  together. 

We  can  hardly  do  much  better  than  to  go  back  to  the  great  Eras- 
mus, who  was  wise  beyond  his  age  and  generation,  and  to  act  upon 
his  clear  advice  in  this  respect.  "Reduce  the  dogmas  necessary  to 
be  believed  to  the  smallest  possible  number,"  were  his  words  of 
counsel.  "You  can  do  it  without  danger  to  the  realities  of  relig- 
ion. On  other  points  either  discourage  inquiry  or  leave  every  one 
to  believe  as  he  pleases — then  we  shall  have  no  more  quarrels,  and 
religion  will  again  take  hold  of  life."  And  the  judgment  of  a  recent 
prophet  is  the  same.  "Theology,"  writes  Shailer  Mathews,  "in- 
dispensable as  it  is,  always  has  been,  and  is  always  likely  to  be, 
a  disintegrating  force  in  Protestantism.  To  simplify  theology  is  to 
unify  society.  With  all  the  stern  realities  of  uncoordinated  social  life 
pressing  in  upon  Christian  people,  it  is  suicidal  to  waste  time  dis- 
cussing the  calculus  of  Religion.  With  the  sanctity  of  the  home 
threatened  by  reckless  divorces  and  even  more  reckless  marriages, 
with  a  generation  polluted  with  a  mania  for  gambling,  with  saloons 
and  brothels  at  its  door,  why  should  the  Church  pause  to  manicure 
its  theology  ?  Facing  the  world  in  the  darkness  of  heathenism,  the 
submerged  tenth  rotting  in  our  cities,  an  industrialism  that  is  more 
murderous  than  war,  why  should  the  Church  stop  to  make  a  belief 
in  the  historicity  of  the  great  fish  of  Jonah  a  test  of  fitness  for  co- 
operation in  aggressive  evangelization?  If  it  would  make  toward 
fraternity,  the  appeal  of  the  Church  must  be  to  life;  and,  so  far  as 
social  significance  goes,  the  Church  that  does  not  make  this  appeal 
is  dead  while  it  lives." 

One  of  the  disgraces  of  Christianity  is  the  divided  condition  of 
Christianity.  In  a  day  when  railroads  are  being  merged  and  busi- 
ness interests  of  various  kinds  united,  and  when  nations  even  are 
drawing  together  in  a  closely  federated  world,  the  Churches  of  the 


33° 

world  still  stand  too  much  apart.  Cleavages  are  sharp  and  differ- 
ences emphasized.  The  condition  oftentimes  has  been  deplored, 
and  remedies  are  being  sought.  And  we,  my  friends,  just  because 
of  our  position,  just  because  we  are  liberal  thinkers,  have  a  duty 
to  perform  and  a  function  to  fulfil  in  helping  to  promote  a  larger 
and  more  generous  unity  of  Christendom.  We,  who  care  so  little 
for  the  dogmas  of  theology,  by  laying  ever  greater  emphasis  upon 
the  deep  realities  of  religion,  will  inevitably  help  to  bring  about  that 
unity  of  purpose  and  of  power  which  are  so  much  needed  in  the 
religious  world  to-day.  To  destroy  the  superficial,  to  disavow  the 
unessential,  that  is  not  much;  but  to  show  the  instinctiveness  of 
worship,  the  inevitable  nature  both  of  trust  and  aspiration, — this- 
seems  to  me  of  real  and  great  account.  For  these,  the  deep  realities 
of  faith,  are  the  things  that  evermore  abide,  and  regarding  which 
there  is  a  minimum  of  difference. 

In  one  of  the  older  towns  of  Germany,  so  I  have  been  told,  they 
undertook  long  years  ago  to  build  a  large  and  ambitious  church 
which  should  take  the  place  of  a  small  and  primitive  chapel.  But 
the  people,  in  their  wish  that  religious  services  might  not  be  dis- 
continued, did  not  tear  the  ancient  structure  down.  They  began 
to  erect  outside  of  it  the  giant  walls  and  soaring  arches  of  the  larger 
church.  The  time  came,  however,  when  a  period  of  war  broke  in 
upon  the  process  of  construction.  Long  years  of  strife  went  by, 
and  the  work  thus  interrupted  never  was  begun  again.  There 
the  buildings  stand,  therefore, — the  little  church  within  where  wor- 
ship still  is  held  and  prayers  and  praises  never  yet  have  ceased,, 
while  without  the  unfinished  aisles  and  arches  of  the  larger  struct- 
ure crumble  into  slow  decay.  And  what  is  that  but  a  true  and 
graphic  picture  of  the  secret  and  abiding  shrine  at  the  heart  of  all 
religion,  behind  the  walls  of  crumbling  and  defective  creeds  and  in- 
sufficient definitions?  It  is  the  spiritual  at  the  heart  of  all  things,, 
the  elements  of  hope,  of  trust,  of  aspiration,  that  endure  unshaken 
and  are  evermore  important. 

It  was  more  than  eighty  years  ago  that  two  English  poets  stood 
together  in  the  shadowed  richness  of  the  cathedral  of  Pisa.  As  the 
organ  was  playing  and  the  soft,  full  notes  were  floating  through  an 
atmosphere  made  mystical  and  sweet  by  the  incense  that  ascended 
from  the  altar,  Leigh  Hunt  suggested  to  Shelley  "  that  a  truly  divine 


331 

religion  might  yet  be  established  if  charity  were  really  under  the 
principle  of  it."     And  Shelley  gave  a  deep  assent. 

To  that  poetic  and  prophetic  wish,  which  never  was  so  near  ful- 
filment as  to-day,  we  may  add  the  music  of  a  gentle  prayer  which 
was  breathed  at  a  later  day  by  a  brother  poet  of  our  own  New  Eng- 
land. Whittier  clearly  saw  the  unifying  power  of  a  real  religion 
of  the  spirit.  May  we  of  this  convention  contribute  something 
which  shall  make  his  prayer  the  practice  of  the  Christian  world  by 
a  closer  union  of  all  Liberal  forces! 

"Forgive,  O  Lord,  our  severing  ways, 
The  separate  altars  that  we  raise, 
The  varying  tongues  that  speak  Thy  praise! 

"Suffice  it  now.     In  time  to  be 
Shall  one  great  temple  rise  to  Thee, 
Thy  Church  one  broad  humanity. 

"White  flowers  of  love  its  walls  shall  climb, 
Sweet  bells  of  peace  shall  ring  its  chime, 
Its  day  shall  be  all  holy  time. 

"The  hymns,  long  sought,  shall  then  be  heard, 
The  music  of  the  world's  accord, 
Confessing  Christ,  the  inward  word! 

"That  song  shall  swell  from  shore  to  shore, 
One  faith,  one  love,  one  hope  restore, 
The  seamless  garb  that  Jesus  wore." 


332 


DE  PROFUNDIS  CLAMAVI. 

PREACHED  AT  ARLINGTON    STREET   CHURCH,  TUESDAY  EVENING, 

SEPTEMBER  24,  BY  THE  REV.  JOHN  HUNTER,  D.D., 

GLASGOW,    SCOTLAND. 

"  Out  of  the  depths  have  I  cried  unto  Thee,  O  Lord.  Lord,  hear  my  voice. 
O  Israel,  hope  in  the  Lord;  for  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy  and  plenteous 
redemption." — Psalm  cxxx.  1,  2,  7. 

I. 

The  Depths  of  Life. 

The  ancient  maxim,  "Self-knowledge  is  the  beginning  of  all 
knowledge, ' '  has  a  nobler  significance  than  that  which  it  often  bears. 
It  is  true,  in  the  sense  of  Saint  Augustine's  memorable  words,  "If 
thou  sinkest  deep  enough  into  the  human,  thou  wilt  find  the  Divine. ' ' 
Not  only  around  us,  but  within  us,  there  is  all  the  mystery  and 
wonder  of  the  universe.  Mind  and  heart  and  soul  are  deeper  than 
we  know.     They  draw  their  life  from  infinite  sources. 

Thomas  Carlyle,  whose  "gospel"  has  been  the  inspiration  of 
much  of  the  best  thinking  and  best  striving  of  two  generations, 
made  a  commonplace  of  the  fact  that  every  great  man  is  a  miracle. 
But  one  need  not  be  "great"  in  order  to  be  a  miracle.  There  is  a 
divine  marvel  in  every  common  man.  Our  heroes  and  saints  are 
not  exceptional,  but  representative  men.  They  reveal  and  interpret 
us  to  ourselves,  disclose  the  depths  of  our  being,  the  appetencies  of 
our  nature,  and  the  possibilities  of  our  life:  their  greatness  is  a 
promise  and  a  prophecy, — the  justification,  not  the  condemnation, 
of  our  aspirations  and  hopes. 

Our  human  nature  and  human  life  have  their  depths,  and  not 
in  anything  are  they  less  understood  than  in  the  depths  which  belong 
to  them.     Their  superficial  aspects  are  forever  hiding  from  us  their 


333 

deeper  realities.  What  calls  itself  knowledge  of  men — acquaint- 
ance with  their  ordinary  thoughts,  passions,  motives,  and  ways, 
with  their  various  humors,  caprices,  follies,  and  weaknesses — is 
not  knowledge  of  man,  of  the  inner  and  real  man  which  the 
outer  man  as  often  conceals  as  reveals.  We  speak  at  times  of  "a 
shallow  man."  But  is  there  any  such  man  anywhere?  There  are 
only  too  many  men  everywhere  who  are  living  on  the  surface  of  their 
nature,  keenly  alive  to  their  earth-born  wants  and  to  the  capacities 
of  human  existence  for  work  and  pleasure,  and  whose  days  are 
largely  the  record  of  mean  ambitions  and  strivings.  But  to  judge 
by  appearances  is  nearly  always  misleading.  The  acutest  judges 
of  character  are  often  at  fault,  and  none  go  more  frequently  and 
lamentably  astray  in  their  reckoning  than  those  who  boast  most 
confidently  of  their  knowledge  of  men.  In  the  so-called  shallow 
man  we  may  perceive,  if  we  look  intently  and  sympathetically  enough, 
what  is  not  shallow,  and  find,  especially  in  those  revealing  hours 
when  the  tragic  forces  of  existence  sweep  into  his  life,  some  sugges- 
tion of  the  latent  power  which  needs  the  fiery  storm  to  throw  it  up 
to  the  surface.  We  are  often  only  passing  judgment  upon  ourselves, 
upon  our  want  of  thought,  imagination,  and  insight,  when  we  pro- 
claim our  fellows  to  be  lacking  in  those  elements  to  which  the  great 
and  deep  things  of  life  make  their  appeal.  In  the  circle  in  which 
we  live  and  move  there  would  be  many  rich  discoveries  for  any  one 
with  fine  imaginative  power,  skilled  to  see  into 

"The  depths  of  human  souls, — 
Souls  that  appear  to  have  no  depth  at  all 
To  careless  eyes." 

There  is  a  well-known  poem  by  Matthew  Arnold  entitled  "The 
Buried  Life," — a  poem  full  of  haunting  music  and  rare  intro- 
spective power.  It  is  a  picture  of  many  a  soul,  and  it  is  not  difficult 
to  fill  in  from  experience  the  outline  which  it  supplies.  We  all  have 
the  power  of  living  so  completely  upon  the  surface  of  our  souls  as 
to  be  ignorant  of  what  is  hidden  in  their  depths.  It  is,  indeed,  a  large 
part  of  the  pathos  and  tragedy  of  life  that  we  are  so  disobedient  to 
the  oracle  which  bids  us  know  ourselves.  We  either  do  not  care  for 
self-knowledge,  or  imagine  we  have  it  in  such  abundance  that  we 
can  swear  by  it  at  times, — "as  well  as  I  know  myself!  "     But  there 


334 

are  moments  when  we  have  glimpses  of  what  we  are  and  may  be, 
of  hitherto  unknown  capacities  and  powers,  and  from  beneath  our 
conscious  life  there  rise  the  murmuring  voices  of  a  deeper,  a  buried 
life. 

"Yet  still  from  time  to  time,  vague  and  forlorn, 
From  the  soul's  subterranean  depth  upborne 
As  from  an  infinitely  distant  land, 
Come  airs,  and  floating  echoes,  and  convey 
A  melancholy  into  our  day: 


A  bolt  is  shot  back  somewhere  in  our  breast, 

And  a  lost  pulse  of  feeling  stirs  again, 

The  eye  sinks  inward,  and  the  heart  lies  plain." 

It  is,  nevertheless,  true  that  many  people  here  and  everywhere  are 
living  superficial  and  shallow  lives.  They  have  either  not  come  to 
themselves,  they  are  still  crude,  undeveloped  beings,  to  the  great  human 
powers  and  affections  their  vital  progress  has  not  yet  advanced;  or 
they  have  fallen  away  from  their  true  life  after  it  had  been  once  and 
well  awake,  and  it  is  now  deeply  buried  beneath  passion  and  pride, 
concealed  under  the  thick  crust  of  a  selfish  and  worldly  nature. 
But  in  them  all  slumber  the  powers  which  make  of  the  sons  of  men 
the  sons  of  God,  and  the  education  of  their  being  is  the  unforgetting 
care  of  Him  from  whom  they  come  and  to  whom  they  go.  In  vain 
do  they  seek  to  escape  from  His  discipline,  and  in  vain  do  they  seek 
peace  otherwhere  than  in  His  will.  In  the  natural  movement  of 
their  days  and  quietly  as  the  night  dawns  upon  a  sleeping  world, 
or  swiftly  and  sharply  in  one  of  those 

"strong,  rushing  hours 
That  do  the  work  of  tempests  in  their  might," 

they  will  be  awakened  out  of  their  vulgar  ways  of  living,  be  made 
aware  of  the  depths  of  their  souls,  and  pass  into  a  new  world  of 
experience  and  knowledge. 

Saint  Augustine  complained  of  the  people  of  his  day,  "No  man 
cares  to  descend  into  himself."  It  is  a  complaint  which  some  of 
our  wisest  teachers  are  repeating  in  our  day.  Few  there  be  who 
care  to  go  down  to  the  depths,  to  have  their  self-complacency  dis- 
turbed, and  be  made  to  feel  deeply  and  think  deeply.     Most  men 


335 

have  no  inwardness.  They  live  altogether  in  the  outward.  The 
brooding,  meditative  gift  is  not  in  them.  In  past  times,  men  suffered 
from  excess  of  introspective  thought,  but  the  disease  which  is  brought 
on  by  too  much  self -reflection  is  not  in  our  day  a  wide-spread  epi- 
demic. Too  much  looking  within  is  not  a  temptation  of  the  modern 
man.  There  is  no  country  less  known  to  him  than  his  own  soul. 
*  After  years  of  life  together,"  he  might  often  confess,  "my  soul  and 
I  are  strangers  yet."  He  is  afraid  of  deeper  experiences,  and  re- 
luctant to  be  on  terms  of  close  intimacy  with  himself.  He  is  quite 
at  home  in  the  visible  and  temporal  order  of  things,  but  he  is  a  pil- 
-grim  and  a  stranger  in  what  the  Scottish  seer  called  "the  Eternities." 
From  the  message  of  the  spiritual  life  he  turns  away  as  if  it  touched 
no  secret  spring  in  his  heart.  It  is  the  voices  without,  not  the  voices 
within,  to  which  he  cares  to  listen.  Even  in  religion,  though  inter- 
ested, and  perhaps  keenly  interested,  in  the  problems  of  its  external 
life,  in  its  ecclesiastical  and  theological  controversies,  in  its  sectarian 
developments,  and  in  its  social  and  philanthropical  activities,  he 
is  unmoved  by  its  inward  and  spiritual  power. 

It  is  often  a  sorrowful  surprise  to  the  earnest  religious  teacher 
to  discover  how  slightly  interested  many  professedly  religious  people 
are  in  religion  and  what  a  trifling  portion  of  their  time  they  give  to 
its  serious  study.  Thorough,  perhaps,  in  everything  else,  they  are 
•content  to  be  superficial  in  all  their  knowledge  of  the  verities  upon 
which  rest  the  world  that  now  is  and  that  which  is  to  come.  Hence 
their  readiness  to  run  after  crazes  and  fantasies,  and  the  little  it 
costs  them  when  brought  into  contact  with  aggressive  unbelief  to 
give  up  altogether  their  religious  faith.  They  are  carried  away 
for  the  most  part  by  scraps  of  knowledge  which  have  come  to  them 
from  newspapers,  magazines,  and  popular  novels.  They  have  "out- 
grown" what  they  had  never  really  grown  into,  and  abandoned  what 
they  never  truly  possessed.  There  is  a  saying  of  Renan's  which 
ought  to  be  well  pondered, — "In  reality,  few  persons  have  a  right 
to  be  unbelievers."  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  much  of  the  fading 
interest  in  spiritual  and  eternal  things  which  has  marked  the  days 
that  are  passing  over  us,  much  of  our  religious  indifference,  and  much, 
also,  of  our  scepticism  and  unbelief,  are  due  to  the  want  of  inward- 
ness, to  the  slight  knowledge  men  in  general  have  of  the  depths  of 
their  life,  and  to  atrophy  of  the  spiritual  senses  through  neglect. 


33^ 

There  can  be  little  doubt,  also,  that  this  neglect  of  the  inner  life  is 
the  explanation  of  the  falling  back  of  many  in  recent  years  upon  tra- 
ditional ecclesiasticism, — the  reverting  to  a  lower  type  of  religion 
which  we  once  supposed  had  been  left  behind.  Men  want  a  certain 
amount  of  assured  religious  belief,  but  they  want  it  without  any  high 
and  prolonged  spiritual  effort  on  their  part.  But  as  long  as  they 
remain  strangers  to  their  own  souls  and  are  content  to  let  others  feel, 
think,  and  believe  for  them,  they  must  be  more  or  less  ignorant  of 
the  reality  of  religion.  We  are  so  made  that  we  cannot  believe  with 
a  real  believing  anything  which  does  not  answer  in  some  measure 
to  our  consciousness  and  experience.  The  ultimate  appeal  of  religion 
is  to  the  soul.  Outside  of  the  soul  the  surest  and  most  convincing 
evidence  of  the  realities  of  faith  can  never  be  found.  The  divinity 
within  us  must  be  awake  to  discern  the  divinity  that  descends  out 
of  heaven  and  is  revealed  in  the  world  and  life.  Without  the  personal 
assurance  which  flows  out  of  experience,  and  which  is  the  result  of 
the  actual  satisfaction  of  our  spiritual  needs  and  yearnings,  we  are 
not  able  to  appreciate  the  great  testimony  to  God  and  to  the  things  of 
God  borne  by  the  religious  experience  of  mankind, — the  collective 
experience  which  is  named  "authority," — a  natural  and  genuine 
authority  by  which  our  spiritual  life  is  enriched  and  we  are  freed 
from  the  limitation  and  narrowness  of  the  mere  individual  stand- 
point. Also,  we  can  never,  outside  of  the  soul,  find  the  true  and 
permanent  ground  and  bond  of  religious  sympathy  and  fellowship. 
On  the  surface  we  are  divided,  often  to  all  appearance  hopelessly 
divided,  but  in  the  depths  we  are  one.  Debate  and  argument,  views 
and  opinions,  drive  and  keep  us  apart,  but  in  the  depths  we  find 
not  only  ourselves,  but  our  brethren, — brethren  breathing  out  the 
same  aspirations  and  prayers,  having  the  same  passion  for  God,  the 
same  need  of  God,  and  the  same  joy  in  God.  It  is  true  of  religion, 
even  in  its  intellectual  aspect  and  expression,  that  those  who  are  able 
to  go  beneath  the  surface  and  have  the  power  of  insight  discover 
unities  underlying  apparently  serious  differences,  but  this  is  still 
more  true  of  religion  as  an  experience.  Spiritual  experience — the 
experience  of  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul — is  the  highest  liberalizing 
influence,  and  the  most  effective  and  satisfying.  It  gives  one  the 
power  to  understand  and  interpret  many  religious  dialects,  and  to 
discern  here  and  now,  beneath   diversities  of  temperament  and 


337 

training,  cult  and  creed,  the  communion  of  saints,  the  Universal 
Church  of  God,  the  Church  of  the  Spirit. 

It  seems  to  me  what  we  most  need  to  bestir  ourselves  about  in 
these  passing  days  is  not  so  much  the  broadening  as  the  deepening 
of  religion,  its  deepening  in  our  own  souls  and  in  the  souls  of  our 
fellows.  In  its  thoughts  of  God  and  his  ways  with  man,  religion 
has  expanded  wonderfully  everywhere  since  the  middle  of  the  last 
century,  but  religion  must  have  depth  as  well  as  breadth.  The 
breadth  that  does  not  proceed  from  depth  is  hardly  worth  having: 
it  is  certainly  not  worth  crossing  the  Atlantic  to  recognize  and  honor. 
The  intensive  movement  is  more  vital  to  progressive  religion  than 
any  expansive  or  forward  movement.  The  course  of  true  religion 
is,  indeed,  most  outward  and  onward  when  it  is  most  inward.  Great 
religious  reformations  ever  date  from  the  quickening  and  deepening 
of  faith  in  the  souls  of  men.  Their  inspiration  and  energy  are  drawn 
from  deeper  depths  than  the  lower  faculties  of  the  mind.  It  is  per- 
haps the  most  serious  defect  of  the  liberal  movement  in  religion  that 
it  is  so  much  more  an  intellectual  than  a  spiritual  movement.  It 
is  the  constant  approach  to  the  things  of  God  primarily  through  the 
intellect  which  sterilizes  much  of  liberal  religion  everywhere,  makes 
of  the  churches  lecture  halls  rather  than  temples  of  the  Spirit,  and 
their  pulpit  a  rabbinized  platform  for  the  exposition  of  philosoph- 
ical ideas  and  doctrines  rather  than  a  place  for  the  delivery  of  a 
message  from  God  to  man.  We  must  go  deeper.  Out  of  and  to 
the  depths  of  life  we  must  speak.  Mere  affinity  of  opinion  and  belief 
is  far  too  outward  and  contracted  for  the  sympathy  of  men  who 
speak  so  much  of  universal  religion  and  hope  and  pray  and  work  for 
the  Universal  Church.  Our  great  facts,  the  things  which  in  our 
hearts  we  all  most  care  for,  are  in  the  depths,  not  on  the  surface.  We 
are  religious,  not  because  the  credentials  of  this  or  that  form  of  relig- 
ion bears  the  strain  of  critical  inquiry  and  satisfies  our  critical  reason, 
but  because  we  have  great  moral  and  spiritual  needs  and  experiences 
to  which  we  believe  our  religion  is  a  full  and  perfect  counterpart, 
corresponding  in  a  deep  and  manifold  way  with  what  we  know  of 
ourselves  and  of  life. 

To  the  soul,  then,  we  must  return.  Out  of  its  depths  have  come 
religions,  Bibles,  prayers,  liturgies,  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual 
songs,  and  it  is  still  full  of  the  elements  of  revelation.     It  is  an  un- 


338 

exhausted  and  inexhaustible  world.  The  outward  universe,  the 
star-sown  abysses  of  space,  have  none  of  those  mysterious  and  un- 
searchable depths  which  we  find  in  our  spiritual  being.  When  we 
gaze  on  all 

"The  splendor  of  the  morning  sky, 
And  all  the  stars  in  company, 
And  think,  How  beautiful  it  isl 
Our  soul  says,  There  is  more  than  this." 

And  there  is  more  than  this.  God  is,  indeed,  immanent  in  the  world 
of  nature  and  in  the  order  of  life,  but  He  is  still  more  intimately 
present  in  the  soul  of  man.  Our  spiritual  being  relates  us  immedi- 
ately to  the  Infinite  and  Eternal  Spirit,  and  it  is  this  divine  depth  of 
root  and  resource  which  is  the  explanation  of  all  our  aspirations 
and  the  justification  of  the  most  daring  hopes  we  can  cherish  of 
illimitable  development. 

n. 

The  Cry  for  God  out  of  the  Depths. 

i.  The  cry  for  God  is  the  natural  utterance  of  the  awakened  soul 
of  man  in  every  land  and  age, — the  cry  of  man  whenever  and  wher- 
ever he  freely  speaks  out  of  the  depths  of  his  nature,  an  aspiration 
which  all  history  confesses.  It  may  not  always  be  an  intelligent  or 
conscious  cry,  but  a  seeker  after  God  man  has  always  been  and 
must  ever  be,  because  from  God  he  comes,  begotten,  not  made,  and 
with  a  nature  so  constituted  that  only  in  God  can  he  find  his  full  and 
final  satisfaction  and  rest.  The  surface  of  his  life  may  often  appear 
to  say  one  thing,  and  its  depths  quite  another  thing,  but  it  is  the  cry 
from  the  depths  which  reveals  what  he  truly  is  and  what  he  most 
needs.  It  is  his  inmost  wants  and  desires,  not  his  hard,  cold  sense 
and  keen  understanding,  which  read  most  rightly  the  secret  of  his 
life.  It  is  not  to  the  surface  of  his  life  his  real  spiritual  needs  belong, 
but  only  those  poor  selfish  cravings  which  are  often  mistaken  for 
them  by  ill-instructed  minds.  Outwardly,  he  may  seem  to  long  and 
cry  for  other  things  more  than  for  the  presence  of  God,  and  to  find 
his  peace  and  joy  in  them,  but  when  his  soul  is  moved  and  searched, 
and  the  fountains  of  its  great  deep  are  broken  up,  in  all  those  crises 
which  throw  light  on  the  inner  condition  and  movement  of   his 


339 

being,  the  cry  for  God  is  seen  to  be  fundamental,  and  his  longing  to 
connect  his  life  in  some  way  with  the  life  of  the  invisible  and  eternal 
world  an  irrepressible  longing,  which  tends  ever  to  rise  into  a  strong 
and  intense  passion. 

In  the  eighteenth  century  some  clever  men  found  an  easy  settle- 
ment of  the  religious  problem  by  dismissing  religion  as  the  invention 
of  priests,  forgetting  that  it  was  the  religious  instincts  and  wants 
which  made  the  priest  and  his  institutions  at  all  possible.  Man  is 
as  distinctively  a  religious  as  he  is  a  social  being, — religious  for  the 
same  reason  as  he  is  domestic,  political,  intellectual,  and  artistic. 
It  is  his  nature  unfolding  to  divine  realities  and  relations,  seeking 
its  corresponding  objects  and  satisfactions.  The  beginnings  of  his 
religion,  like  the  beginnings  of  all  other  things  in  his  history,  may 
be  dim  and  vague  and  feeble,  but  it  ought  to  be  judged,  as  we  judge 
the  other  things,  by  its  essential  quality  and  most  perfect  expression, 
and  not  by  its  early  and  rude  forms,  not  by  the  physical  beginnings 
of  spiritual  instincts  and  the  sense-conceptions  and  sense-language 
of  primitive  religious  feelings.  It  is  not  independent  of  his  mental 
and  moral  development,  of  his  general  condition  and  culture.  It 
grows  as  he  grows.  It  is  not  something  grafted  upon  his  nat- 
ure from  without,  but  comes  out  of  his  nature, — a  component  part 
of  himself,  which  he  must  train  and  develop.  Revelation  is  neces- 
sary to  its  purifying  and  perfecting,  but  revelation  does  not  and 
cannot  create  the  religious  capacity  or  instinct.  For  a  revelation 
received  and  understood  there  must  be  that  in  man  to  which  it  appeals, 
— something  in  the  depths  of  his  personal  being  akin  to  what  is  in 
the  infinite  and  unsearchable  depths  of  God.  Matthew  Arnold  used 
to  say  that  religion,  if  it  is  to  continue,  must  be  based,  not  on  tra- 
ditions and  documents,  but  on  its  natural  truth;  and  of  course  that  is 
so  if  by  its  natural  truth  we  mean  its  correspondence  with  the  funda- 
mental facts  of  life  and  with  the  generalized  experience  of  man- 
kind. We  need  have  no  hesitation  in  affirming  boldly  its  natural 
truth  when  we  call  to  mind  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  history  of 
our  race  older  and  more  universal,  more  central  and  commanding, 
than  religion.  Its  many  and  various  forms,  the  great  historical 
religions  and  the  older  religions  out  of  which  they  grew,  all  have 
their  roots  struck  deep  in  human  nature.  Whenever  and  wherever 
man  begins  to  reach  the  truly  human  level,  he  begins  to  worship, 


34Q 

and,  the  more  human  he  becomes,  the  more  do  the  sentiments  of 
awe  and  reverence,  dependence  and  submission,  reinforced  by  the 
larger  trusts  which  longer  and  wider  experience  give  him,  become 
natural  to  him.  It  is  just  because  he  is  what  he  is  that  his  spiritual 
attitude  is  that  of  a  believer  and  worshipper,  and,  had  he  no  other 
Bible  than  his  own  soul,  he  would  never  be  without  a  living  witness 
for  God.  In  its  wonder  and  awe,  in  its  fear  and  hope,  in  its  sense 
of  goodness  and  truth  and  beauty,  in  its  aspiration  after  perfection, 
in  its  shame  because  of  failure,  in  its  joy  in  obedience  and  service  and 
sacrifice,  and  in  all  its  idealizing  yearnings  which  never  in  these 
mortal  years  get  their  right  and  complete  command  over  the  life, 
he  who  watches  and  studies  wisely  and  patiently  will  discover  God, 
and  from  the  sympathetic  observation  of  all  such  experiences  have 
the  persuasion  confirmed  that  religion  is  natural  to  man,  and  that, 
the  more  of  God  man  takes  into  his  life,  the  more  natural  he  be- 
comes. It  would  be  easier  to  deny  the  tendency  of  matter  to  a  com- 
mon centre,  or  the  tendency  of  man  to  draw  to  his  fellows,  than  to 
deny  the  native  tendency  and  movement  of  the  human  soul  to  God. 
Its  only  language  may  be  a  cry;  but  how  full  of  meaning  and  proph- 
ecy is  that  cry! — the  cry  of  the  soul  for  God  as  it  comes  to  us  down 
all  the  ages,  from  every  people  and  from  every  literature  which  utters 
the  mind  of  a  people,  and  from  the  noblest  spirits  of  every  race, 
interpreting  most  clearly  the  voice  of  humanity  as  it  speaks  through 
them.  "All  men,"  said  Homer,  "cry  after  the  gods."  "Through 
all  heathendom,"  said  Saint  Paul,  "men  seek  after  the  Lord,  if  haply 
they  may  feel  after  Him  and  find  Him."  "The  human  soul,"  said 
Tertullian,  "is  naturally  Christian.  The  testimonies  of  the  soul  [to 
God]  are  as  true  as  they  are  simple,  as  simple  as  they  are  universal, 
as  universal  as  they  are  natural,  as  natural  as  they  are  divine." 
"If  we  will  but  listen  attentively,"  said  Max  Miiller,  "we  can  hear 
in  all  religions  a  groaning  of  the  spirit,  a  struggle  to  utter  the  un- 
utterable, a  longing  after  the  infinite,  a  love  of  God." 

There  is  not,  I  am  persuaded,  even  a  touch  of  exaggeration  in  the 
statement  that  the  greatest  discovery  of  the  nineteenth  century  was 
the  discovery  of  the  ancient  religions, — of  what  men  before  Christ 
and  before  Moses,  in  a  dim  and  far  past  and  in  countries  like  Egypt 
and  India,  thought  about  God  and  life.  It  has  made  us  hear  clearly, 
rising  from  every  land  and  from  every  age,  from  men  divided  by 


Wrn^' 

D . 

M 

r  WJ 

4        '£f 

PROF.  G.  SUBBA  RAU 
Calicut,  India 


REV.  SAICHIRO  KANDA 
Tokyo,  Japan 


REV.  CHARLES  STRONG,  D.D. 
Melbourne,  Australia 


B.  M.  SEHANAVIS,  BA. 
Calcutta,  India 


34i 

leagues  of  space  and  centuries  of  time,  ignorant  and  enlightened, 
mean  and  noble,  the  cry  out  of  the  depths  of  the  soul  for  God,  even 
the  living  God. 

Everywhere  in  our  own  age  as  well  as  in  past  ages  may  be  heard 
the  cry  for  God.  It  is  the  advanced  spiritual  desire  of  humanity. 
To-day,  as  yesterday,  out  of  the  depths  of  his  soul,  man  cries  to  God, 
however  much  his  noisy  passions,  follies,  and  cares,  and  the  tumult 
of  the  world  may  make  inaudible  the  voice  of  his  deeper  mind  and 
deeper  heart.  It  was  once  said  by  a  celebrated  English  lawyer  of 
our  time  that  the  man  who  could  not  get  on  without  religion,  who 
could  not  occupy  his  mind  with  love,  friendship,  business,  politics, 
science,  art,  literature,  and  travel,  must  be  a  poor  kind  of  creature. 
It  is,  on  the  contrary,  the  man  who  can  be  wholly  satisfied  with 
outward  and  earthly  things  apart  from  God  who  is  the  poor  kind  of 
creature,  living  upon  the  surface  of  his  nature,  with  the  energies  of 
his  spirit  still  dormant  or  so  suppressed  and  overborne  that  they 
are  in  danger  of  dying  out.  To  be  truly  a  man  is  to  have  infinite 
capacity  for  God,  to  have  desires,  affections,  and  needs  which  the 
things  of  civilization  and  culture  cannot  satisfy,  which  can  only  be 
satisfied  in  communion  with  the  Divine.  Man,  be  he  what  he  may, 
is  made  to  be  a  seeker  after  God;  and,  because  he  cannot  escape 
from  himself,  he  cannot  escape  from  God.  The  cry  for  God  is  heard 
as  soon  as  he  comes  to  himself,  and  it  becomes  clearer  and  more 
persistent,  more  passionate  and  pathetic,  the  further  he  goes  into 
himself.  In  his  more  careless  moods  he  may  play  with  doubts,  amuse 
himself  with  negative  views  and  cheap  rationalism,  and  treat  religion 
as  if  it  were  merely  something  to  be  examined,  pulled  to  pieces,  and 
criticised;  but  out  of  the  depths  of  his  unbelief  the  unconscious  faith 
of  the  soul  never  fails  to  make  itself  heard.  In  spite  of  crowds  of 
easy  livers  here  and  everywhere  and  the  extraordinary  supply  of  the 
means  of  excitement,  which,  giving  vivid  interest  and  attractiveness 
to  the  outward  life,  tend  to  stupefy  and  deaden  the  religious  sense, 
men  cannot  live  utterly  contented  without  God.  The  way  they  are 
caught  now  and  again  by  all  kinds  of  fanaticism  proves  that  the 
promise  and  potency  of  religious  faith  are  still  there.  It  is  also  an 
impressive  fact  that  behind  all  the  surface  play  of  the  forces  in 
modern  life  that  tend  to  obscure  or  even  to  challenge  and  deny  the 
fundamental  religious  beliefs,  the  religious  nature  of  man  may  be 


342 

seen  asserting  itself,  and  often  in  strange  ways.  The  philosopher's 
bold  statement  that  man  becomes  more  and  more  religious  is  not  with- 
out warrant.  The  religious  affections  may  be  changing,  here  and 
there,  their  objects  and  modes  of  expression;  but  they  are  not  losing 
their  energy.  The  phenomena  which  are  often  regarded  as  signs 
and  proofs  of  religious  decay  are  more  justly  interpreted  as  religion 
passing  through  a  process  of  transformation.  There  are  move- 
ments of  thought  and  feeling,  far  below  the  upper  tides,  and  disturb- 
ing agitations  which  we  see  and  chronicle,  that  bear  silent  but  strong 
witness  to  the  upward-looking  instincts  and  impulses  of  humanity. 
There  is,  as  has  often  been  pointed  out,  hardly  a  form  of  the  deeper 
thinking  and  deeper  living  of  our  time  which  dees  not  reveal  the 
inherent  and  indestructible  religiousness  of  man.  The  ideal  sub- 
stitutes for  God  upon  which  our  more  serious  and  cultivated  unbe- 
lievers have  been  spending  their  devotion  these  many  days  prove  how 
deep  in  the  soul  and  unescapable  are  the  religious  instincts  and  needs. 
The  cry  for  truth,  for  right,  for  justice,  for  love,  is  a  cry  for  God. 
The  moments  in  which  men  long  and  strive  most  purely  and  intensely 
for  the  triumph  of  truth  and  justice  and  love  are  moments  of  uncon- 
scious prayer,  the  prayer  which  includes  in  its  sweep  all  our  unselfish 
desires  and  yearnings  and  strivings.  "All  my  springs  are  in  Thee," 
said  the  Hebrew  Psalmist.  God  is  at  the  root  of  all  our  ethical 
aspirations  and  purely  human  enthusiasms,  and  to  Him  they  lead. 
Without  Him  they  remain  partial  and  fragmentary,  only  in  Him  do 
they  find  their  centre  and  unity,  their  strength  and  stay. 

2.  And  thus  are  we  led  to  observe  that  the  cry  for  God  is  the  aspi- 
ration of  the  whole  nature  of  man  when  he  is  true  to  it.  It  is  not  an 
isolated  thing,  the  expression  of  one  faculty,  a  single  experience:  it 
is  in  the  structure  and  strain  of  our  being,  in  its  living  unity  of  powers 
and  tendencies  and  manifold  needs.  In  all  the  faculties  and  affec- 
tions of  our  complex  nature  we  are  created  for  God,  and  through 
them  all  we  are  meant  to  rise  upward  to  Him. 

God  is  a  demand  of  the  intellect  as  well  as  a  longing  and  need  of 
the  heart.  Reason  seeks  God  as  much  as  any  other  of  our  nobler 
human  powers,  and  in  the  fully  and  symmetrically  developed  man 
it  is  ever  seen  to  be  a  faculty  of  reverence.  Out  of  the  depths  of  all 
true  and  earnest  thought  on  the  mystery  of  the  world  and  life  the 
quickened  mind  aspires  to  God,  rises  instinctively  to  the  one  supreme 


343 

and  universal  Mind  which  the  order  of  things  bespeaks,  and  in  which 
alone  it  can  find  a  satisfaction  proper  to  its  characteristic  nature. 
Thought  as  it  deepens  confirms  and  justifies  our  own  religious  aspi- 
rations and  trusts.     We  remember  Shelley's  line, — 

"O  thou  Immortal  Deity 
Whose  throne  is  in  the  depth  of  human  thought," — 

and  the  philosopher's  saying  that,  while  a  little  knowledge  inclineth 
men  to  atheism,  depth  of  knowledge  brings  them  back  to  God. 
Because  in  mind  as  well  as  in  heart  and  conscience  man  is  kindred 
to  God,  the  full  development  of  the  mind  must  lead  at  last  to  God, 
and  God,  we  may  be  sure,  has  not  made  the  world  in  such  a  way 
that  the  honest  and  thorough  study  of  it  will  lead  men  away  from 
Himself.  The  complete  witness  of  the  human  reason  to  God  is  yet 
to  come,  but  God  is  its  inevitable  goal.  The  end  of  all  deep  thinking 
must  be  to  put  men  more  and  more  into  the  mood  and  attitude  of 
worship.  Much  of  the  intellectual  movement  of  our  times  may  indi- 
cate instability  and  superficiality,  but  in  its  more  serious  forms  it  is 
the  modern  spirit  dissatisfied  with  old  and  familiar  explanations 
of  the  material  and  spiritual  universe,  yet  seeking  the  innermost 
truth  and  reality  of  things,  crying  in  its  own  way  with  the  ancient 
Hebrew  for  God,  and  confessing  with  the  Christian  saint  that  it  is 
restless  until  it  finds  rest  in  Him  who  is  the  truth  itself. 

And  what  has  been  said  of  deep  thinking  may  be  said  of  every 
form  of  deep  feeling.  It  must  render  us  religious,  deep  calling  unto 
deep.  The  sense  of  beauty  which  makes  poets  and  painters,  and  is 
more  or  less  in  all  men,  belongs  to  the  image  of  God  in  man  and  is 
meant  to  put  us  in  touch  with  the  spiritual  and  eternal  in  all  created 
things,  and  to  raise  us  into  communion  with  Him  to  whom  Saint 
Anselm  prayed  as  the  Absolute  Beauty.  Admiration,  the  power  of 
perceiving,  appreciating,  and  enjoying  things  lovely  and  great  and 
wonderful,  rises  into  adoration.  Seas  and  skies  and  mountains,  the 
dawn  of  day,  a  night  of  stars,  kindle  in  the  susceptible  soul  the  senti- 
ments of  worship.  The  feeling  which  noble  music  produces  is  of 
the  nature  of  aspiration:  it  is  a  longing  towards  some  divine  good, 
consciously  or  unconsciously  a  longing  toward  Him  who  is  the  source 
and  centre  of  all  good  and  all  harmony.  It  has  been  said  of  the  high- 
est kind  of  music  that  the  hearing  of  it  enables  one  to  realize  his 


344 

immortality.  It  touches  and  awakens  some  inner  sense  which  our 
common  experience  only  partially  satisfies;  it  fills  the  mind  with 
those  great  and  high  feelings  and  with  those  far-reaching  thoughts 
that  pass  beyond  all  earthly  bounds  and  wander  through  eternity. 
And  the  same  is  true  of  all  the  deeper  parts  and  passions  of  our 
being.  Our  human  affections  at  their  best  have  their  flower  and 
fruit  in  spiritual  and  heavenly  aspirations.  Our  human  love  of 
goodness  stirs  in  us  the  divine  love,  and  is  included  in  it,  and  opens 
our  nature  to  God  as  the  sun  opens  the  earth  in  spring.  Our  desire 
of  excellence — excellence  of  character  and  excellence  of  work — 
bears  witness  to  God  and  is  a  cry  after  His  perfection.  Our  moral 
aims  and  strivings  are  fulfilled  in  religion.  Our  religion  is  the  ful- 
filment of  the  deepest  instincts,  affections,  needs,  and  experiences 
of  our  nature.  As  the  fire  seeks  the  sun  and  the  river  the  ocean,  so 
does  our  life  in  all  its  deeper  and  larger  aspects  move  towards  Him 
who  is  its  beginning  and  its  end.  We  must  have  God  to  understand 
and  explain  our  nature  and  life.  He  is  the  answer  to  all  that  is  good 
and  best  in  ourselves,  to  our  powers  of  intellect,  imagination,  affec- 
tion, conscience,  to  our  faculties  of  worship,  aspiration,  and  hope. 
"When  I  awake,"  said  the  Hebrew  saint,  "I  shall  be  satisfied  with 
God."  "The  life  of  man,"  said  one  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Christian 
Church,  "is  the  vision  of  God."  Out  of  the  depths  our  souls,  as 
they  awake,  cry  for  God;  and  only  with  God  can  they  be  finally 
satisfied,  only  in  communion  with  Him,  spirit  with  spirit,  can  be 
found  the  fulness  of  life  and  joy. 

3.  The  cry  for  God  is  an  importunate  cry  in  all  the  critical  mo- 
ments and  experiences  of  life.  What  is  true  of  the  depths  of  our 
nature  is  true  of  the  depths  of  our  life  as  it  is  lived  in  the  world.  In 
its  deep  places  where  we  come  face  to  face  with  its  serious  realities 
we  are  taught  what  we  truly  are  and  are  made  aware  of  our  divine 
relations  and  needs.  Under  the  pressure  of  critical  emergencies 
the  most  fundamental  things  in  our  life  come  to  the  surface.  In 
our  great  and  sore  straits,  if  at  no  other  time,  the  soul  reveals  its 
divine  kinship  and  lifts  its  cry  to  God. 

It  is  true  that  our  deep  experiences  are  not  all  sorrowful.  Joy 
may  be  as  profound  as  grief,  and  out  of  the  depths  of  joy  every 
sound-hearted  man  breathes  forth  his  gratitude  not  merely  for  good 
found  or  achieved,  but  received.     In  all  its  supreme  moments  life 


345 

turns  inevitably  to  God.  In  all  our  deep  experiences  God  has  a 
part,  and  almost  in  spite  of  ourselves  we  recognize  it. 

But  be  glad  and  grateful  as  we  may  and  ought  to  be  for  all  that 
brightens  and  sweetens  life,  yet  as  things  are  now,  it  is  sorrow  more 
than  happiness  that  drives  us  to  God.  We  have  a  nature  endowed 
with  infinite  capacities  for  pain,  and  there  is  no  escape  but  an  ignoble 
one  from  some  form  of  the  pain  which  makes  the  cross  the  true 
symbol  of  a  large  part  of  every  man's  life.  "Perhaps  to  suffer," 
wrote  the  Swiss  theologian,  Vinet,  in  one  of  his  letters,  "is  nothing 
else  than  to  live  deeply.  Love  and  sorrow  are  the  conditions  of  a 
profound  life."  A  truer  word  was  never  spoken.  The  tragedy  in 
which  we  live  is  meant  to  educate  us.  There  would  indeed  be  no 
understanding  of  life  at  all,  did  we  not  know  from  experience  that 
in  life's  depths  we  receive  our  best  teaching  and  training.  Out  of 
the  depths  have  come  the  finest  poetry,  the  finest  music,  the  finest 
speech  of  the  world.  "The  Bible  owes  its  place  in  literature,"  said 
Emerson,  "not  to  miracles,  but  to  the  fact  that  it  comes  from  a  pro- 
founder  depth  of  life  than  any  other  book."  Out  of  the  depths  have 
come  the  most  inspired  and  inspiring  of  the  psalms  of  faith,  both 
ancient  and  modern.  Out  of  the  depths  men  have  brought  blessings 
which  are  rarely  found  in  green  pastures  and  by  still  waters.  We 
never  know  how  much  God  is  the  one  great  need  of  the  soul  till  we 
go  down  to  the  depths. 

There  are  depths  of  physical  weakness  and  suffering  out  of  which 
men  cry  to  Him  whose  will  concerning  them  they  often  forget  in 
health  and  ease,  and  only  remember  when  sickness  comes  in  and 
shuts  out  the  world. 

There  are  worldly  anxieties  and  losses  which  rudely  break  up 
all  the  shallow  optimism  that  has  no  deeper  root  than  the  self-com- 
placency produced  by  prosperity,  and  which  take  men  down  below 
the  surface  of  life  into  its  deep  places  where  they  learn  to  pray,  or 
to  pray  as  never  before. 

There  is  the  sorrow  of  bereavement,  common,  yet  never  common- 
place, the  pain  that  comes  from  broken  fellowships;  and  in  their 
spiritual  solitude  and  desolation  men  are  driven  to  seek  higher  help 
and  comfort  than  any  which  the  world  can  give. 

There  are  experiences  of  fallibility  in  understanding  what  we  ought 
to  do ;   critical  hours  in  life  when  serious  responsibilities  press,  and 


346 

grave  questions  which  mere  acuteness  cannot  settle;  and  men,  in 
their  extremity,  feel  the  need  of  a  wisdom  which  they  do  not  find  in 
themselves,  and  of  a  guidance  which  their  fellows  cannot  give,  and 
they  cry  unto  God,  "Lead  me  and  teach  me." 

There  are  depths  of  disappointment  and  failure  in  our  best  work, 
— sympathies  imperfectly  met,  misplaced  trusts,  broken  purposes, 
and  defeated  hopes;  and  it  is  especially  the  ministry  of  such  noble 
failure  to  draw  forth  the  powers  latent  in  every  human  being,  and 
to  make  God  felt  as  the  one  supreme  necessity  of  life. 

There  is  the  struggle  with  moral  limitation  and  weakness, — the 
sensitive  temperament,  the  ill-balance  of  a  finely  endowed  mind, 
the  want  of  will-power,  the  overgrowth  of  impulses  good  in  them- 
selves,— inheritances  which  make  life  so  tragic  to  many, — the  struggle 
with  forces  within  and  forces  without  which  seem  adverse  to  a  noble 
development,  and  which  make  the  most  aspiring  and  faithful  souls 
feel  that  they  cannot  do  the  things  they  would. 

The  Psalm  from  which  our  text  is  taken  is  familiar  to  many  de- 
vout people  as  one  of  the  seven  penitential  Psalms.  It  was  dear  on 
this  account  to  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Savonarola,  Luther,  Hooker, 
Owen,  Baxter,  Wesley,  and  to  many  more  of  the  elect  spirits  of  our 
race.  And  it  surely  cannot  be  that  any  man  capable  of  deep  feel- 
ing can  be  wholly  ignorant  of  the  saddest  tragedy  of  human  life 
which  is  seen  in  the  conflict  between  desire  and  duty,  in  the  effort  to 
reconcile  the  ideal  and  the  actual,  and  to  be  at  peace  with  God. 
Who  dees  not  know  of  this  struggle,  interpret  it  how  he  may?  Who 
has  not  cried  out  in  the  agony  of  it,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am,  who 
shall  deliver  me?"  When  one  passes  in  review  before  the  tribunal 
of  his  heart  the  irrevocable  years,  what  wonder  if 

"Oft  his  cogitations  sink  as  low 
As,  through  the  abysses  of  a  joyless  heart, 
The  heaviest  plummet  of  despair  can  go." 

Though  it  is  only  one  experience  of  the  spiritual  life,  and  must 
not  be  allowed  to  overshadow  all  the  rest,  yet  the  sense  of  dissatis- 
faction, deepening  into  the  sense  of  guilt,  lies  near  the  heart  of  all 
personal  religion  worthy  of  the  name.  It  marks  the  awakening 
of  the  higher  life;  it  is,  as  Carlyle  once  said,  the  beginning  of  all 
progress.     The   worst   conscience  is  not   the  one    that  is   most 


347 

sensitive  to  evil  and  most  troubled  by  wrong  things  done  and  good 
things  left  undone,  but  the  conscience  that  is  so  dull  as  to  have  no 
experience  of  guilty  pangs  and  terrors,  and  that  can  make  its  pos- 
sessor able  to  fit  his  greatest  transgressions  into  a  self-satisfied  view 
and  scheme  of  life,  and  to  reconcile  himself  to  memories  of  passion 
and  shame.  In  men  morally  healthy  and  well  developed  the  sense 
of  sin,  of  evil  done  with  full  consent  of  the  will,  is  a  reality,  not  a 
shallow  emotion, but  a  profound  grief,  the  thought  not  of  their  weaker 
moments,  but  of  their  sanest  hours.     It  is  simply  self-knowledge. 

It  is  a  universal  law  of  the  higher  life  that,  the  better  a  man  becomes, 
the  more  sensitive  he  is  to  sin,  and  not  only  to  his  own  sin,  but  to 
the  sins  of  his  fellows,  the  sins  of  the  nation,  of  society,  of  the  church, 
of  the  community  in  which  he  lives.  It  is  the  best  men  who  feel  most 
keenly  the  burden  of  human  iniquity  and  confess  the  abounding 
moral  evil  of  the  world  as  if  it  were  their  own  evil;  it  is  they  who  are 
most  conscious  of  the  wrong-doing  of  their  fellows  and  suffer  most 
on  account  of  it,  and  not  the  actual  wrong-doers  themselves.  It 
was  so  with  the  Hebrew  poet.  The  pathos  of  the  great  lovers 
and  helpers  of  mankind  is  in  his  Psalm.  It  is  the  utterance  of  an 
intensely  personal  emotion,  but  it  is  more  than  personal.  He  speaks 
in  the  name  of  Israel,  merging  his  own  feeling  in  the  shame  and 
repentance  of  his  people.  "I  wish,"  said  that  great  prophet  and 
saint  of  God,  Frederick  Denison  Maurice,  "to  confess  the  sins  of 
my  land  and  time  as  my  own."  It  is  almost  impossible  to  imagine 
a  truly  godly  life  without  this  underlying  sensitiveness  and  sadness, 
without  this  suffering  heart  of  holy  love  and  sympathy,  which  is  the 
thing  likest  God  in  this  world. 

In  ancient  India,  perhaps  more  than  fifteen  hundred  years  before 
our  Psalm  was  written,  men  sung  a  hymn  which  obviously  came  out 
of  the  same  experience  as  this  passionate  Hebrew  poem  of  penitence 
and  prayer.  It  was  translated  into  English  out  of  the  dead  Sanskrit 
tongue  by  Professor  Max  Miiller.    These  are  the  English  words: — 

Let  me  not  yet,  O  my  God,  enter  into  the  house  of  clay: 

Have  mercy,  Almighty,  have  mercy. 
If  I  go  trembling  like  a  cloud  driven  by  the  wind: 

Have  mercy,  Almighty,  have  mercy. 
Through  want  of  strength,  thou  strong  and  bright  God,  have  I  gone  wrong: 

Have  mercy,  Almighty,  have  mercy. 


348 

Wherever  we  men,  O  God,  commit  an  offence  before  the  heavenly  host : 
Wherever  we  break  the  law  through  thoughtlessness: 
Have  mercy,  Almighty,  have  mercy. 


III. 

The  Divine  Answer  to  the  Cry  out  of  the  Depths. 

Is  there  any  divine  response  to  the  call  of  humanity  for  God  to 
these  many  and  varied  cries  out  of  the  depths  of  our  human  being 
and  life  ?  There  must  be  in  the  nature  of  things,  we  are  persuaded, 
such  a  response,  something  outside  of  man  answering  to  his  inner 
life  and  fulfilling  its  needs,  actual  movement  and  manifestation  on 
the  part  of  God  corresponding  to  our  natural  cravings  after  Him. 
Out  of  the  depths  man  cries:  down  to  the  depths  God  must  come, 
meeting  with  a  corresponding  answer  every  real  and  deep  want  of 
the  souls  He  has  made  to  seek  after  Him,  if  haply  they  may  feel  after 
Him  and  find  Him.  Whatever  may  be  the  relations  between  human 
aspiration  and  divine  condescension,  whatever  be  the  conditions  of 
the  coming  down  of  the  heavenly  help  to  human  need,  it  is  simply 
impossible  for  any  religious  soul  to  think  that  there  is  no  approach 
of  God  to  man.  Unless  life  be  a  tremendous  unreality  and  illusion, 
and  we  come  into  the  world  only  to  be  fooled  and  cheated;  unless 
the  universe  departs  from  its  order  in  dealing  with  the  spiritual  neces- 
sities of  mankind  and  the  cry  for  God  meets  with  exceptional  treat- 
ment, quite  unlike  that  given  to  the  other  functions  and  attitudes 
of  our  nature, — it  is  simply  inconceivable  that  the  fundamental 
cravings  of  the  soul  can  exist  without  their  satisfaction  and  the 
prayer  from  the  depths  remain  unanswered.  Many  of  our  religious 
teachers  may  say  too  much  on  this  matter  and  speak  presumptu- 
ously of  what  God  has  done  and  can  do,  but  their  overstatements  to 
those  who  are  living  in  the  consciousness  and  communion  of  God  are 
better  and  nearer  the  truth  than  denials  and  negations.  It  is,  indeed, 
not  difficult  to  believe  in  divine  condescension  in  an  answering, 
revealing,  redeeming  God,  when  one  truly  believes  in  God, — believes, 
that  is,  in  infinite  and.  eternal  goodness.  It  appears  inevitable  that 
man  should  look  with  longing  and  hope  for  help  from  on  high, 
for  he  cannot  understand  his  life,  its  whence,  and  why,  and  whither, 


349 

apart  from  God.  It  cannot  be,  he  is  sure,  having  no  choice  of  exist- 
ence, that  he  should  be  here  in  this  world  endowed  with  a  myste- 
rious nature,  called  to  live  a  life  full  of  most  serious  significance, 
without  the  presence  and  help  of  God.  He  has  a  right,  he  feels, 
to  trust  Him  from  whom  he  comes,  and  to  believe  that  no  light  from 
heaven  can  lead  astray,  least  of  all  those  great  religious  aspirations 
and  wants  which  have  lived  through  all  human  ages,  overreaching 
all  stretches  of  history,  and  are  still  the  highest  necessities  of  the 
soul.  No  strong  crying  and  tears  will  make  God  answer  our  self- 
ish or  fictitious  wants;  but  that  He  is  responsive  to  what  is  best  in 
man,  that  He  is  answering  day  after  day,  age  after  age,  the  spiritual 
aspirations  and  needs  of  humanity,  is  a  necessary  belief  to  every 
one,  Christian  or  non-Christian,  who  believes  in  the  reality  and 
closeness  of  the  bond  between  God  and  man,  in  the  affinity  of  man 
for  that  life  in  God  which  is  the  true  end  of  his  being. 

"O  Israel,  hope  in  the  Lord;  for  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy 
and  plenteous  redemption."  "He  is  mindful  of  His  own;  He  remem- 
bers His  children."  The  movement  cannot  be  all  on  the  side  of  man. 
Job  had  caught  a  glimpse  of  an  eternal  truth  of  life  when  he  rested 
his  hope  of  vindication  and  deliverance  upon  the  desire  which  his 
Maker  had  toward  the  work  of  His  hands.  That  the  desire  of  God 
has  brooded  over  humanity  from  the  beginning,  and  still  broods 
over  the  life  of  the  children  of  men,  is  a  thought  which  holds  a  central 
place  in  the  literature  of  religion;  and,  however  difficult  it  may  be 
to  reconcile  this  lovely,  human  way  of  thinking  of  God  with  our 
abstract  conceptions  of  Deity,  it  brings  us  closer,  we  feel  sure,  to 
the  divine  reality  of  things  than  ways  which  we  may  fancy  to  be 
grander  and  more  philosophical.  We  are  fond  of  contrasting 
the  littleness  of  man  and  the  awful  brevity  of  his  days  upon  this  earth 
with  the  immeasurable  creation  which  science  reveals;  but,  if  God 
be  love,  then  our  passionate  human  life  must  be  more  to  Him  than  a 
whole  universe  of  passionless  worlds.  What  answer  can  masses  of 
clay  and  stone,  however  huge  and  old,  give  to  the  desire  of  His  heart? 
Can  we  frame  any  worthy  thought  of  God  which  excludes  the  idea 
of  His  need  of  the  love  and  trust  and  obedience  of  His  children?  If 
the  word  "Father"  spells  but  one  syllable  of  the  divine  name,  then 
we  may  speak  not  only  of  man's  need  of  God,  but  reverently  of  God's 
need  of  man,  of  divine  love  that  seeks  the  answering  love  of  its  sons 


35° 

and  daughters,  of  Deity  ever  going  forth  out  of  the  abysmal  depths 
of  His  perfection  to  give  Himself  to  His  creation  and  His  children 
because  it  is  His  nature  and  property  so  to  do. 

It  is  told  of  Pascal  that  often  he  seemed  to  hear  God  saying  to 
him,  "Thou  couldst  not  seek  Me,  hadst  thou  not  already  found  Me." 
Yes,  we  seek  God  because  He  has  first  sought  us  and  found  us.  The 
cry  out  of  the  depths  is  more,  therefore,  than  a  mere  human  breathing : 
it  is  itself  a  divine  inspiration.  Our  pure  unselfish  longings  for 
truth  and  goodness,  our  prayers  for  union  with  God,  are,  as  Saint 
Paul  taught  long  ago,  the  spirit  making  intercession  for  us, — that 
highest  human  voice  which  is  ever  one  with  the  divine  voice,  which 
is  the  divine  voice  rising  from  the  depths  of  our  humanity  and  speak- 
ing through  our  spiritual  needs.  In  the  movements  of  the  human 
spirit  we  see  the  workings  of  the  divine  spirit.  It  is  the  divine  love 
of  goodness  that  cries  out  in  us  when  conscience  bears  witness  for 
good.  It  is  the  divine  hatred  of  evil  that  cries  out  in  us  when  con- 
science awakes  in  protest  against  evil.  It  is  because  we  are  made  in 
the  moral  image  of  God  and  are  united  to  Him,  not  by  baptism  or 
conversion,  but  by  birth,  that  our  whole  nature  thrills  with  what 
moves  the  divine  nature.  In  its  last  analysis  there  can  be  no  noble 
aspiration  in  man  which  is  not  an  impulse  from  Him  in  whom  we 
live  and  move  and  have  our  being.  In  the  realm  of  our  inner  life 
God  does  not  begin  His  work  where  we  leave  off.  It  is  not  man  down 
here  and  God  up  there  with  a  vast  stretch  of  distance  between.  In 
all  the  experiences  of  our  life  and  growth  He  is  present,  mingling 
His  life  with  ours,  silently  and  potently.  Not  here  and  there,  not 
now  and  then,  but  always  and  everywhere  He  is  near,  acting  upon 
the  human  spirit  from  within  as  well  as  from  without,  immediately 
as  well  as  mediately,  speaking  down  to  and  up  from  the  depths 
of  the  heart  and  conscience, — deep  answering  to  deep. 

We  interpret,  and  rightly  interpret,  the  various  religions  of 
mankind  as  man  seeking  God;  but  they  may  also  be  regarded,  and 
rightly  regarded,  as  God  seeking  man.  "  Unaided  reason,"  men  have 
been  in  the  way  of  exclaiming,  as  they  contemplated  the  various 
religious  systems  of  the  world  outside  the  Hebrew  and  the  Christian 
religions.  But  we  may  well  ask,  with  Cardinal  Newman,  whether 
the  reason  of  man  is  ever  unaided.  There  are  not  two  kinds  of 
religion,  natural  and  revealed.     From  the  point  of  view  of  human 


35i 

capacity  and  seeking  and  effort  all  religion  is  natural:  from  the 
point  of  view  of  divine  manifestation  all  religion  is  revealed.  The 
Logos  doctrine  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  whatever  else  it  teaches, 
teaches  the  divine  activity  in  our  world  from  the  beginning.  It 
would  be  an  error  to  suppose  that  God  neglected  the  larger  part  of 
mankind  because  of  His  more  intimate  dealings  with  one  section  of 
the  human  race.  It  must  be  true,  if  God  be  one  and  His  name  one, 
that  men  of  like  passions  and  needs  as  ourselves,  who  came  from  God 
and  belong  to  God,  and  are  nourished  physically  by  His  air  and 
sunshine  and  fruits  of  the  earth,  must  also  have  provision  made 
in  the  divine  order  of  things  for  the  sustenance  of  their  spiritual 
life,  and  that  it  is  not  left  entirely  to  the  tender  mercies  of  their 
fellows  whether  they  shall  have  God  or  be  without  God  in  the  world. 
It  must  be  true  that  God  cares  equally  for  the  souls  of  all  His  children, 
and  that  He  finds  access  to  them,  helps  them,  teaches  them,  com- 
forts them,  saves  them,  by  methods  and  means  that  are  not  seen  and 
temporal,  and  by  ways  in  which  no  man  can  tell  whence  He  cometh 
and  whither  He  goeth,  and  that  He  is  only  limited  in  the  giving  of 
Himself  to  them  by  their  capacity  to  respond  and  receive.  People 
of  old  used  to  think  that  the  divine  action  was  confined  to  here  and 
there,  now  and  then;  but  the  conviction  is  growing  and  spreading 
that  the  only  defensible  conception  of  the  moral  action  of  God  on 
humanity  is  that  of  a  continuous  and  impartial  influence,  limited  to 
no  age  or  race.  To  our  enlightened  feeling  it  is  becoming  more  and 
more  presumptuous  to  say  that  His  spirit  can  only  work  along  one 
line  of  human  thought,  or  can  only  bring  men  to  Himself  through  one 
set  of  defined  successions  of  emotion  or  experience.  Personal  inti- 
macy with  God  is  not  an  experience  special  to  Jews  or  Christians, 
The  knowledge  of  the  revelation  of  God  in  Hebrew  and  Christian- 
history  is  an  unspeakable  blessing,  but  those  whom,  in  the  order  of 
Providence,  it  never  reaches,  are  not  hereby  excluded  from  the 
communion  of  the  spirit.  A  truer  and  larger  faith  in  God  as  the 
everlasting  Father  and  Teacher  and  Saviour  of  mankind  has  made 
it  no  longer  possible  for  intelligent  and  believing  men  to  regard  all 
religions  outside  the  Jewish  and  Christian  pale  as  superstition  and 
falsehood,  or  to  keep  up  the  old  pitying  and  condescending  attitude 
towards  them.  Their  immaturities  and  corruptions  we  no  longer 
allow  to  cheat  us  of  the  right  to  say,  God  is  good  to  all:  whither  shall 


352 

we  go  from  His  spirit  ?  He  has  never  left  Himself  without  a  witness, 
never  left  multitudes  of  His  creatures  without  His  help,  without  light 
and  guidance,  without  comfort  and  salvation. 

"The  Unseen  Power,  whose  eye 
Forever  doth  accompany  mankind, 
Hath  looked  on  no  religion  scornfully 
That  man  did  ever  find. 

"Which  has  not  taught  weak  wills  how  much  they  can? 
Which  has  not  fallen  on  the  dry  heart  like  rain? 
Which  has  not  cried  to  sunk-self,  weary  man, 
Thou  must  be  born  again!  " 

The  deep  needs  of  the  soul  which  make  man  look  longingly  for 
help  from  above  and  beyond  himself,  even  from  God,  may  be  inter- 
preted as  a  cry  for  knowledge  of  Him  with  whom  he  has  to  do,  a 
cry  for  reconciliation  or  union  with  him,  a  cry  for  light  and  guidance, 
a  cry  for  strength  and  consolation  and  peace.  The  divine  response 
to  this  vast  and  varied  cry  of  humanity  has  been  made,  we  believe, 
in  some  degree,  to  the  whole  race  of  mankind. 

"Tell  me,  I  pray  thee,  thy  name,"  is  a  cry  out  of  the  depths  which 
man  has  raised  to  God  in  every  land  and  age.  It  is  as  natural  as  it 
is  vital.  To  know  the  character  of  the  Unseen  Power  that  orders 
our  birth  and  death  and  all  our  life,  and  what  His  relation  and  atti- 
tude are  to  those  whom  He  made  to  seek  after  Him,  is  a  craving  which 
every  human  being  exercising  normal  powers  must  at  times  feel  and 
express.  And  in  some  way  and  in  some  measure  God  has  been 
answering  this  cry,  has  been  revealing  Himself  to  man  through  all  the 
ages  of  man's  life  here  upon  this  earth.  Revelation  has  been  slow 
and  gradual,  not  because  of  any  divine  reluctance  or  caprice,  but 
because  it  waits  upon  human  development,  upon  the  quickening  and 
unfolding  of  man's  highest  powers.  In  troubled  and  bewildered 
hours  man  has  been  heard  complaining,  "Verily  Thou  art  a  God 
that  hidest  Thyself";  and  yet  the  light  has  ever  come  as  fast  as  he 
could  bear  it  and  receive  it.  There  is  no  want  of  revelation.  There 
is,  indeed,  nothing  but  revelation.  From  the  beginning  God  has 
been  revealing  Himself  to  men  by  the  order  and  beauty  and  bounty 
of  the  world,  through  the  natural  affections,  by  the  teaching  and 
learning  of  life  and  the  education  of  history.     Knowledge  of  nature 


353 

and  man  is  knowledge  of  God.  In  finding  order,  harmony,  bounty, 
beauty,  truth,  wisdom,  justice,  goodness,  and  love,  God  is  found. 
It  is  all  revelation  from  nature  to  man  and  from  man  to  highest  man. 
God  has  ever  been  actively  present  in  the  world,  and  especially  in 
man  and  in  the  upward  movements  of  his  intellectual  and  moral 
life.  We  dare  not  pretend  to  limit  the  ways  by  which  He  makes 
known  His  personality  and  His  presence,  and  moves,  illuminates, 
and  guides  His  children.  He  draws  nigh  to  them,  not  only  in  and 
through  His  creation  and  the  course  of  history,  not  only  through 
the  teaching  and  example  of  His  great  prophets,  holy  servants, 
and  beloved  sons,  but  immediately,  mind  with  mind,  spirit  with 
spirit.  In  all  ages  men  have  had  experience  of  an  immediate  pres- 
ence, of  a  God  who  has  access  to  their  inmost  being  and  acts  in 
their  secret  life,  who  reveals  Himself  by  impressions  upon  their  spirits, 
and  whose  voice,  when  they  are  hushed  to  listen,  is  heard,  not  in 
their  ears,  but  in  their  souls. 

Yes,  God  is  ever  coming  down  into  our  life,  coming  more  and 
more.  His  advent  is  unceasing:  new  light  from  the  eternal  source 
of  light  is  ever  flowing  into  human  souls.  What  is  needed  is  not 
more  activity  of  manifestation  on  the  part  of  God,  but  more  suscep- 
tibility to  the  divine  manifestation  on  our  part,  souls  which  have  been 
taken  pains  with  for  the  sake  of  the  unseen  and  spiritual  and  been 
made  sensitive  to  God. 

The  cry  of  our  humanity  for  reconciliation  and  union  with  God 
is  also  a  cry  which  God  is  ever  answering.  The  great  obstacle  to 
religion  in  our  world  is  not  ignorance,  but  sin.  More  than  enlight- 
enment, we  need  salvation.  Can  all  our  civilization  minister  to  a 
troubled  conscience  ?  Can  all  our  culture  heal  a  guilty  pang  ?  Can 
the  knowledge  of  any  scientific,  philosophical,  or  theological  truth 
subdue  an  evil  passion  ?  But  in  the  depths  of  our  weakness  and  sin 
God  is  our  salvation.  The  deliverance  of  man  is  dear  to  God.  It  is 
the  essential  nature  of  love  to  seek  and  to  save.  Because  God  is 
love,  He  is  ever  coming  down  to  the  depths  of  our  life,  depths  of  sor- 
row and  sin,  the  deepest  depths  of  degradation,  in  order  to  help  and 
to  bring  to  Himself,  by  all  the  power  of  His  love,  His  wayward  and  dis- 
obedient children.  Whether  it  be  a  fallen  or  a  rising  world  we  live 
in,  we  know  in  our  hearts  that  we  need  reconciliation  with  the  God 
of  the  world:  blessed  be  His  eternal  love !    He  has  never  been  outside 


354 

His  world,  but  has  been  always  in  it,  bearing  the  sins  and  carrying 
the  sorrows  of  our  race.  Its  history  is  the  history  of  redemption, 
the  history  of  the  unceasing  efforts  of  Him  with  whom  we  have  to  do, 
to  influence  without  compelling  the  vagrant  and  stubborn  wills  of 
men.  Through  all  the  human  ages,  ever  since  sin  began  to  darken 
the  face  of  the  world,  the  seeking  and  saving  love  of  God  has  been 
a  reality.  All  the  great  attitudes  and  acts  of  God  are  eternal.  "That 
which  was  from  the  beginning  declare  we  unto  you."  "His  goings 
forth  have  been  of  old  and  from  everlasting."  It  was  not  a  new  and 
strange  work  which  the  beloved  Son  of  God  did  in  our  world.  His 
work  is  not  an  isolated  divine  effort,  an  interpolation  in  human  his- 
tory, but  the  reflection  and  revelation  in  a  part  of  space  and  time  of 
the  universal  and  eternal  labor  and  passion  and  sacrifice  of  God. 
Without  Jesus  the  world  was  for  thousands  of  years,  but  not  without 
a.  God  delighting  to  forgive  and  mighty  to  save.  The  work  of  Christ 
is  based  on  the  deeper  and  larger  fact  of  the  love  and  mercy  and 
•care  of  the  Eternal  toward  all  mankind.  We  are  learning  its 
deepest  lesson  when  we  see  in  it  a  picture  of  what  God  is  always 
doing, — always  helping  His  children,  always  saving  them  in  His  infi- 
nite goodness  and  mercy.  And,  as  it  was  then,  it  is  now  and  ever 
shall  be,  world  without  end. 

And  not  only  through  Christ  and  men  inspired  with  the  spirit 
of  his  life  and  the  charity  of  his  cross  does  God  reconcile  the  world 
to  Himself,  but  the  whole  economy  of  things  is  so  ordered  as  to  bring 
men  at  every  point  into  contact  with  God.  Unto  nature  and  unto 
all  the  forces  which  enter  into  human  life  have  been  committed  the 
ministry  of  reconciliation.  This  is  their  final  meaning  and  end  as 
far  as  man  is  concerned.  By  all  the  natural  processes  and  experiences 
of  life,  by  the  discipline  of  toil  and  hardship,  joy  and  sorrow,  by 
the  retribution  which  warns  us  back  to  the  ways  of  righteousness 
and  peace  and  the  moral  purpose  that  is  in  all  events,  God  our  Father 
from  the  beginning  has  been  reducing  and  destroying  the  moral 
separation  between  Himself  and  His  children,  and  been  seeking  to 
bring  them  to  the  obedience  and  fellowship  of  sons. 

But  here  again  the  work  of  God  on  man  is  more  within  than 
without.  Immanent  in  men,  He  co-operates  with  the  aspiration 
and  effort  of  every  man  towards  reconciliation  with  goodness,  and 
.therefore  with  the  universal  movement  of  the  race.     He  is  the  ulti- 


355 

mate  cause  of  all  progress  and  the  unseen  source  and  inspiration 
of  all  our  human  strivings  to  draw  near  to  Him.  We  seek  Him 
because  He  first  seeks  us.  And  the  meeting-place  is  often  in  the 
lowest  depths,  where  we  are  struggling  with  weakness  and  sin  or  are 
sinking  under  them.  At  the  point  where  sin  leaves  us  in  the  dark- 
ness of  shame  and  despair  God  in  His  mercy  finds  us  and  is  nigh 
to  help  and  save. 

The  most  central  truth  of  our  religion  is  just  the  helpfulness,  the 
universal  and  eternal  helpfulness,  of  God.  This  is  the  heart  of  the 
religion  of  the  Hebrew  poets  and  prophets.  "O  Israel,  thou  hast 
destroyed  thyself,  but  in  Me  is  thy  help."  "In  God  is  my  salvation 
and  my  glory,  the  rock  of  my  strength  and  my  refuge  is  in  God." 
This,  also,  when  we  put  aside  all  those  strange  accretions  which 
have  gathered  about  it  in  its  passage  through  the  thoughts  of  men, 
is  the  message  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  God  was  the  eternal  shepherd 
of  souls,  who  seeks  until  he  finds.  It  is  the  message  which  the  Church 
has  been  repeating  age  after  age,  clearly  or  faintly,  in  differing  and 
often  confusing  phrase :  God  is  with  us,  with  us  in  the  deepest  depths, 
with  us  in  our  greatest  humiliations,  with  us  in  our  bitterest  shames, 
with  us  in  our  terriblest  sorrow,  with  us  to  forgive  and  save,  to 
strengthen  and  comfort. 

It  is  the  glory  of  Jesus  Christ  that  to-day  as  yesterday  he 
inspires  men  who  come  directly  under  his  influence  with  this 
enthusiasm  of  faith  in  the  redeeming  mercy  and  love  of  the 
Eternal.  To  those  of  us  who  have  been  born  in  Christendom 
the  hope  of  the  old  Hebrew  saint  in  plenteous  mercy  and  redemption, 
in  infinite  resources  of  saving  love  and  power  in  the  divine  nature, 
is  ours  more  than  ever.  The  gospel  of  him  who  sounded  the  depths 
of  human  sorrow  and  sin,  who  descended  to  hell  in  another  and  truer 
sense  than  is  meant  in  the  creed,  who  went  down  into  the  depths 
of  the  world's  evil  and  felt  its  power,  his  gospel  is  a  gospel  of  hope. 
What  is  emphatically  his  secret  is  the  new  and  greater  trust  and  hope 
in  God  which  he  implanted  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men.  His 
most  central  thought  concerning  human  suffering  is  that  it  is  joy  in 
the  making.  His  most  central  thought  concerning  abounding  sin 
is  more  abounding  grace, — infinite  possibilities  of  moral  recovery 
and  repair.  Men  and  women!  haunted  and  persecuted  by  sleepless 
memories  of  passion  and  failure  and  shame,  you  have  no  right  to 


356 

despair  of  yourselves,  for  that  is  to  doubt  God.  His  love  is  deeper 
than  all  the  depths  of  moral  evil  into  which  you  can  sink.  The 
hope  of  salvation  to  the  uttermost  has  ever  come  to  men  through 
the  experience  of  real  and  intimate  fellowship  with  God.  In  all 
lands  and  ages  the  men  who  have  stood  nearest  God  have  believed 
most  grandly  in  His  infinite  charity  and  grace.  Through  him  who 
said  that  he  was  one  with  the  Father  has  been  preached  unto  the 
world  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Because  God  is  love,  holy  and  inex- 
orable love,  He  must  be  forever  and  ever  a  God  who  forgiveth  sin, — 
the  infinite  giver  of  a  power  that  makes  men  better,  filling  them  with 
new  tempers,  new  affections,  new  loyalties,  through  which  the  weak 
become  strong  and  the  bad  good,  the  infinite  giver  of  a  power  which 
takes  away  sin  in  the  only  sense  sin  can  ever  be  taken  away,  by  mak- 
ing the  sinner  hate  his  sin,  turn  against  it  and  away  from  it,  and  love 
and  follow  the  good. 

In  recent  days  we  have  heard  much,  perhaps  too  much,  of  "  Old 
Theology"  and  "New  Theology."  What  is  described  as  the  Old 
Theology  made  much  of  the  sense  of  sin  and  the  need  of  forgiveness. 
It  regarded  human  nature  chiefly  under  the  aspect  of  sinfulness  and 
guilt.  It  forgot  that  human  nature  is  not  a  simple  and  single  thing, 
and  that  a  gospel  to  commend  itself  to  all  men  must  be  wide  as  human 
need.  Its  marvellous  strength  in  the  days  when  it  was  heartily 
accepted  and  believed  grew  out  of  its  limitations,  but  these  also 
were  the  cause  of  its  weakness  and  its  decay.  It  provoked  a  reaction 
from  which  we  are  at  present  suffering.  Our  liberal  theology  is  too 
often  just  as  partial  and  one-sided,  failing  to  meet  the  needs  with 
which  the  old  orthodox  presentation  of  religion  chiefly  dealt.  A 
well-meaning  religious  teacher  was  speaking  on  the  beauty  of  good- 
ness to  a  gathering  of  poor  people  in  the  slums  of  a  great  city.  "  Your 
rope  isn't  long  enough  for  the  likes  of  us, "  shouted  one  of  his  hearers. 
Now  it  is  not  wisdom  to  think  that  we  have  touched  bottom  because 
our  plummet  has  ceased  going  down.  It  may  only  mean  that  the 
soul  and  life  are  too  deep  for  our  soundings.  What  is  described  as 
"  New  Theology"  must  have  much  of  the  Old  Theology  in  it  to  enrich 
and  complete  it  if  it  is  to  satisfy  in  any  real  and  abiding  way  the 
spiritual  needs  of  men.  Sin  and  forgiveness,  reconciliation  and  union 
with  God,  must  not  hold  in  it.  a  secondary  place.  Its  preachers  must 
have  the  historic  sense,  and  come  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil.      The 


357 

thought  of  the  immanent  God  which  has  become  so  real  and  vivid 
in  our  time  that  it  seems  to  many  like  a  new  revelation  does  not, 
wisely  understood,  lessen  our  faith  in  the  ever-revealing  and  ever- 
redeeming  God.  But  it  is  required  of  religious  teachers  who  would 
meet  the  deepest  cravings  of  humanity  not  only  to  believe  in  the 
Divine  Immanence,  but  to  have  some  personal  experience  of  God's 
present  help  and  salvation.  Saint  Augustine  tells  us  that  his  chief 
reason  for  writing  his  imperishable. confessions  was  to  praise  God 
before  men  for  raising  him  from  such  depths  of  sin,  "lest  any  other 
might  lie  down  and  sleep  in  despair  and  say,  'I  cannot  awake.'" 
It  is  still  preachers  who  can  tell  men  from  their  own  experience  of 
the  love  and  mercy  and  grace  of  God  whom  our  world  most  needs. 
Of  all  men,  the  preacher  must  not  be  weak  in  faith;  he  must  be  no 
doubter,  no  cynic,  no  pessimist.  He  must  be  a  great  believer  in  the 
great  things,  also  an  unconquerable  optimist,  a  man  of  abounding 
hopefulness;  for  he  lives  to  inspire  and  diffuse  hope,  to  make  men 
feel  and  believe  that  they  live  in  a  world  not  under  God's  wrath  and 
curse,  but  under  His  love  and  blessing,  and  that  neither  life  nor 
death,  northings  present  nor  things  to  come, will  be  able  to  separate 
them  from  the  Eternal  Charity  and  Care. 

When  the  saintly  Quaker,  John  Woolman,  lay  on  his  death-bed, 
the  feeling,  he  said,  "of  the  extent  of  the  sin  and  misery  of  my  fellow- 
creatures  separated  me  from  the  Divine  Harmony,  and  was  more 
than  I  could  bear.  But,  in  the  depths  of  my  distress,  I  remembered 
that  Thou,  O  Lord,  art  omnipotent,  and  that  I  had  called  Thee 
Father;  and  again  I  was  made  quiet  in  Thy  will  and  looked  for 
deliverance  from  Thee!"  To  God  we  must  ever  look  when  there 
is  darkness  without  and  within.  We  must  not  let  the  sorrow  and 
sin  of  the  world  rob  us  of  our  faith  and  hope.  There  can  be  no 
such  thing  as  unchanging  and  persistent  evil  in  the  world,  for 
God  is  never  outside  of  His  world.  He  is  ever  indwelling  and  at 
work  in  His  moral  as  in  His  physical  creation,  and  present  in  all 
shapes  and  depths  of  evil  as  the  infinite  spirit  of  goodness  working 
for  goodness,  the  everlasting  Father  and  Saviour  of  men.  "O 
Israel,  hope  in  the  Lord;  for  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy  and 
plenteous  redemption." 


358 


DEPARTMENT  MEETINGS. 


DEPARTMENT    OF   THE    HISTORY  AND  PHILOSOPHY 
OF    RELIGION. 

Held  in  Pilgrim  Hall,  Congregational  House,  on  Tuesday  after- 
noon, September  24.  Rev.  George  A.  Gordon,  D.D.,  of  Boston, 
presiding. 

The  Chairman  in  a  few  felicitous  words  introduced  Rev.  Gott- 
fried Schoenholzer,  pastor  of  the  New  Minster  in  Zurich,  Switzer- 
land, whose  paper  was  on  Martin  Luther's  historical  utterance  at 
the  Diet  of  Worms.  Mr.  Schoenholzer's  address  was  delivered  in 
German,  but  the  translation  of  it,  which  follows,  had  been  distributed 
in  pamphlet  form  among  the  audience,  making  it  easy  to  comprehend 
him. 


359 


"HERE    I  STAND.     I   CANNOT    DO    OTHERWISE. 
MAY  GOD  HELP  ME!" 

A  True  Maxim  for  Liberal  Protestants. 

BY  REV.  GOTTFRIED  SCHOENHOLZER,  OF  ZURICH,  SWITZERLAND. 

Did  Martin  Luther  actually  end  his  classic  reply  at  the  Diet  of 
Worms  on  the  18th  of  April,  1521,  with  these  very  words?  This 
no  one  can  prove,  any  more  than  the  exact  wording  of  the  historic 
utterance  of  Galileo  on  the  23d  of  June,  1633, — "Epur  si  muove!" 
But  both  expressions  represent  the  situations  and  utter  the  thought 
of  these  great  thinkers  in  their  greatest  moments  in  an  unsurpassable 
manner. 

You  may  have  seen  on  a  May  morning  a  dewdrop  lying  upon  a 
delicate  blossom  of  the  spring.  It  performed  the  service  of  a  convex 
lens,  and  showed  clear  and  enlarged  the  finest  filaments  of  the  petals 
beneath.  So,  in  the  early  morning  of  the  enthusiasms  of  a  people 
for  its  heroes,  myths  and  legends  settle  down  on  the  objects  of 
their  admiration,  and  we  are  permitted  to  gaze  into  depths  of  soul 
which  the  actual  words  of  these  great  spirits,  spoken  under  stress 
of  circumstances,  would  hardly  have  revealed  to  us  so  clearly.  For 
this  is  the  deeper  sentiment  of  these  devoutly  stubborn  sons  of 
God  in  the  greatest  hours  of  their  life:  "Here  I  stand.  I  cannot  do 
otherwise.     May  God  help  me!" 

The  first  concern  of  a  reforming  spirit  is  to  take  a  firm  stand.  So 
the  great  sculptors  have  represented  them.  How  firmly  they  are 
planted  on  the  fixed  base  of  their  convictions, — Luther  at  Worms 
and  in  the  Church  of  the  Protestation  in  Speyer,  Vadian  in  the 
market  place  of  St.  Gall,  and  our  own  Zwingli  in  Zurich,  with  Bible 
and  sword,  gazing  afar  over  his  native  Alps!  The  sculptor,  in  each 
case,  has  known  how  to  express  the  thought  that  these  heroes  possessed 
something  fundamental  on  which  to  base  their  protest  and  their 
defence.     They  are   all  a  reproduction  of  Archimedes   with   his 


36° 

famed  utterance,  "Give  me  a  standing-place  and  I  will  move  the 
world!" 

To  merely  say  no  is  an  easy  matter.  Children  can  do  that.  If 
adults  exercise  this  inborn  love  of  negation  in  a  narrrow,  one-sided 
way  in  religious,  political,  or  economic  affairs,  then  they  act  in  a 
childish  manner.  The  mere  love  of  criticism  and  negation  is 
puerile.  Young  persons  and  the  old  war-horses  of  reform  often 
find  particular  pleasure  in  protesting,  in  denial.  Unless  their  Nay 
is  founded  on  a  deeper  Yea,  before  which  the  defender  of  the  ancient 
and  loved  order  of  things  must  bow  in  acknowledgment,  it  is  nat- 
ural that  he  will  attribute  their  negations  to  frivolity  or  obstinacy. 
Often,  to  be  sure,  he  does  not  see  this  Yea,  and  does  not  wish  to  see 
it,  even  if  it  has  long  been  shining  in  the  souls  of  those  who  lead 
in  the  attack.  The  princes  and  representatives  of  cities,  who  at 
the  Imperial  Diet  at  Speyer  in  1529  raised  their  protest  against 
the  assumption  that  the  most  intimately  personal  and  sacred  thing 
which  a  man  possesses  (namely,  his  religion)  should  be  decided 
by  a  majority  vote, — these  were  called  Protestants,  in  the  reproach- 
ful sense  of  obstinate  deniers.  Yet  they  possessed,  like  the  ancient 
prophets,  like  Jesus  and  the  Reformers,  a  mighty  Yea  as  the  basis 
for  their  Nay.  They,  too,  could  say:  "Here  I  stand.  I  cannot  do 
otherwise!"  What  was  then,  in  all  ages,  the  firm  foundation  which 
made  the  true  and  serious-minded  Protestants  so  irresistible?  I 
sum  it  all  up  in  one  sentence.  It  was  the  inwardly  experienced, 
directly  known,  and  eternal  life  of  God  in  their  souls,  in  contrast  with 
all  temporal  forms  of  mediation,  such  as  the  priesthood,  a  hierarchi- 
cal church,  churchly  works,  ceremonies,  sacraments,  the  interces- 
sion of  the  saints,  and  the  like.  All  these  finite  and  temporal  insti- 
tutions, caricatures  often  of  the  religious  life,  have  the  tendency 
to  flow  together  and  form  a  substitute  for  inward  and  spiritual  re- 
ligion. Therefore,  all  protest  against  Rome  culminates  in  the  oppo- 
sition to  its  polypiferous  nature,  so  destructive  to  all  national  life. 
In  the  degree  in  which  a  child  of  God  has  forced  his  way  to  the 
conception  of  the  unmediated  character  of  personal  salvation,  such 
as,  for  instance,  we  find  expressed  in  the  Beatitudes  of  Jesus,  it 
must  protest  against  all  this  impedimenta  of  baggage,  which  burdens 
his  ethical  life  and  limits  his  communion  with  God.  Because  it 
proceeds  from  what  is  innermost  and  best  in  man,  every  religious 


361 

protest — that  of  the  Waldenses,  the  Reformers,  of  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth— has  an  elemental  and  indestructible  power.  But  this  only 
when  its  Nay  is  the  reverberation  of  a  still  grander  Yea. 

Only  the  religious  man  is  really  justified  and  permanently  suc- 
cessful in  making  a  religious  protest.  From  this  point  of  view  much 
light  is  shed  upon  protests  which  have  failed.  By  the  seventeenth 
century  much  of  the  Protestant  protest  had  degenerated  into  dog- 
matic disputes,  and  had  so  lost  its  power.  Also  many  persons  are 
Protestants  to-day,  not  from  inward  conviction,  but  because  of 
hatred  of  the  political  power  of  Rome.  Their  protest  is  nothing 
but  an  empty  beating  of  the  air.  Their  seeming  victories  over 
Rome  will  soon  be  annihilated  again.  Though  the  Christianity  of 
the  Roman  Church  is,  in  our  opinion,  very  much  distorted,  and  of 
the  earth,  earthy,  yet  in  its  distortion  it  is  still  a  greater  power  than 
the  irreligion  of  many  zealous  anti-clericals  who  are  not  able  to 
oppose  Rome  from  the  firm  foothold  of  an  internal  religious  con- 
viction. Against  this  Church,  which  still  contains  much  true  re- 
ligious life,  one  cannot  triumph  by  means  of  force,  contempt,  and 
scorn,  but  solely  through  a  higher  and  better  piety. 

But  our  protest,  thus  based  on  an  inward  and  firm  conviction,  is 
not  only  applicable  to  the  Church  of  Rome;  it  must  also  be  uttered 
against  the  stagnation  in  the  work  of  the  Reformation  in  our  own 
Church. 

One  must  admit  that  Protestant  Churchmanship  has  also  been 
held  back,  and  its  progress  retarded  by  the  power  of  habit  and  of 
written  and  oral  tradition. 

Here  we  stand.  This  we  believe,  this  is  our  position;  that  is  to 
say,  "our  spiritual  life  is  intended  for  harmony,  and  not  for  dis- 
sonance. If  it  is  to  be  well  with  us,  our  inner  world  of  thought  and 
feeling  must  not  occupy  itself  with  conceptions  which  are  opposed 
to  the  laws  of  our  reason.  Our  inventory  of  beliefs  must  not  be 
cut  off,  like  a  separate  domain,  from  the  knowledge  and  activity 
of  our  rational  powers.  It  will  not  do  for  us  to  write  in  one  sub- 
division of  our  minds,  "  Christ,  entirely  and  completely  human, " 
and  in  the  other,  "  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  born  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  sinless,  omniscient,  and  almighty."  God  meant  the  spiritual 
and  the  rational  in  man  to  go  together.  The  example  of  Luther 
shows  how  much  trouble  is  caused  by  trying  to  tear  them  asunder. 


362 

Luther  read  in  Corinthians,  as  we  still  read  to-day:  "For  as  in  Adam 
all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive,"  and  in  Romans: 
"  For,  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were  made  sinners,  so 
by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous."  This 
Luther,  in  his  Bible  Commentary,  calls  an  absurd  doctrine,  one  op- 
posed to  reason.  That  one  man  should  be  a  substitute  for  all  men, 
and  that  we  all  should  die  or  live  through  the  imputed  merit  of 
another,  this  seemed  to  him  to  be  senseless.  But  here  it  is  in  the 
Scripture;  the  Scripture  is  God's  word.  "Therefore  I  will  believe 
it,"  Luther  said  to  himself,  thus  compelling  himself  to  accept  it, 
since  to  doubt  would  be  a  sin  against  God  and  a  rejection  of  his 
explicit  revelation.  "Therefore,  if  temptations  should  again  come 
to  me,  if  doubts  of  salvation  should  arise,  I  will  believe  the  word 
of  God  literally  and  wholly.  He  has  said  it:  that  decides  all.  If 
he  deceives  me,  I  am  blessedly  deceived.  To  stand  by  the  literal 
text,  to  close  one's  eyes  to  all  else,  is  the  one  thing  needful.  What 
Christ  in  his  Sacrament,  and  Paul  in  his  epistle,  which  is  God's 
word,  have  told  us,  must  be  true,  even  if  no  human  being  can  under- 
stand it."  Luther  went  so  far  that  he  characterizes  objections  of 
the  human  reason  in  these  matters  as  the  Devil's  work.  He  heaps 
upon  this  supreme  gift  of  God  truly  blasphemous  abuse.  He  him- 
self is  brought  by  this  unholy  inner  contradiction  to  the  verge  of 
despair.  "I  was,"  he  tells  us,  "thrown  about  in  the  storms  and 
floods  of  despair  and  blasphemy  against  God."  At  the  Diet  of 
Worms,  on  that  great  day  in  his  career,  he  demanded  of  his  op- 
ponents "just,  sound  reasons."  He  appealed  to  the  Scriptures, 
but  as  interpreted  by  reason  and  conscience.  At  other  times  it 
was  the  Scripture  alone  to  which  he  assigns  the  right  of  deciding  the 
issue.  Such  is  the  fatal  inconsequence  of  the  Reformation,  which 
called  into  being  an  inner  schism  among  its  followers.  But  here 
stand  we,  the  sons  of  the  Reformation.  Its  inner  and  fundamental 
unity  must  be  preserved.  The  reason  and  the  sentiments  must  not 
stand  opposed  to  each  other.  What  God  hath  joined  together  let 
no  man  put  asunder.  If  in  our  attitude  towards  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  we  are  Unitarians,  we  must  be  such  still  more  with 
respect  to  our  spiritual  powers  and  potencies.  And  here  we  stand; 
that  is,  on  the  conviction  that  one  law,  one  all-including  order  con- 
trols the  course  of  things.     On  the  acceptance  of  this  truth  rests 


363 

all  our  knowledge  of  the  world,  all  our  scientific  understanding  of 
nature  and  mind,  all  education,  all  our  knowledge  of  man's 
place  in  the  universe.  The  reason  in  man  comprehends  the  reason 
which  is  in  the  course  of  things.  The  mathematic  in  us  is  cognizant 
of  that  in  the  universal  order.  This  world-order  must  be  an  un- 
broken and  eternal  one,  or  it  is  not  order  and  law.  It  would  throw 
the  whole  economy  of  the  world  into  confusion  if  on  a  single  occasion 
iron  was  lighter  than  water,  as  is  related  in  Kings  vi.  6,  or  if 
once  only  the  sun  stood  still  (Joshua  x.  13),  or  if  in  a  single  instance 
fluid  water  stood  fast  before  a  word,  or  if  a  man  really  dead  had, 
through  a  spoken  word,  or  in  any  other  way,  come  to  life  again. 
For  one  who  is  reared  in  reverence  for  the  Biblical  world  of  miracles 
and  wonders  it  is  nothing  less  than  a  catastrophe  to  awaken  to  the 
modern  conception  of  the  world,  a  painful  "I  cannot  otherwise," 
but  yet  a  firm  "I  cannot  otherwise."    Truth  above  all! 

But  what  becomes,  in  all  this  radicalism,  of  the  conclusion  of 
Luther's  saying,  "God  help  me!"  Oh,  if  we  could  attain  to  a  joy- 
ous uplift  towards  God,  to  a  rock-based  belief  in  God  and  trust  in 
him,  it  would  indeed  be  a  splendid  declaration, — "Here  I  stand." 
And  on  such  a  firm  foundation  there  would  be  erected  a  still  more 
splendid  "I  cannot  do  otherwise."  Well,  then,  let  us  enter  with 
courage  upon  the  road  to  this  faith  in  God.  I  am.  I  comprehend 
myself  totally  and  briefly  in  this  word  /.  I  am  conscious  of  myself. 
This  consciousness  is  to  me  an  immutable,  incontestable  fact  of  my 
nature.  All  other  being  depends  for  me  on  my  own  being.  This 
also  is  for  me  absolutely  established.  I  think,  I  am  a  thinker.  I 
think  myself,  and  I  think  the  world.  Thought  is,  and  without  it 
nothing  exists  for  me.  That  which  I  do  not  think  is  nothing  for 
me.  Is  it  then  so  preposterous  to  conceive  of  an  intelligence  which 
includes  all  being,  a  thought  which  comprehends  all  existence,  which 
I  will  call  God?  Of  what  import  against  this  is  the  objection,  "I 
have  sought  with  telescope  and  with  microscope  through  all  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  and  have  nowhere  encountered  God "  ?  Is 
our  most  real  possession,  our  spirit,  our  soul,  an  object  to  be  sur- 
veyed through  such  instruments?  Can  you  prove  its  existence  by 
mathematics  or  the  processes  of  natural  science?  Not  so!  We  can 
prove  absolutely  nothing  about  even  our  own  spirit.  We  can  only 
experience  it.     What  wonder,  then,  that  we  cannot  prove  the  all- 


364 

including  Spirit.  But  one  cannot  bring  the  shadow  of  a  proof 
against  this  existence  of  God  as  a  world-embracing  spirit.  If,  then, 
both  cannot  be  proved  by  the  usual  methods  (that  is,  by  experi- 
ment and  dialectic),  what  is  to  decide  the  matter  for  a  rational  man? 
I  think  analogy  will  solve  it, — the  analogy  of  the  human  spirit  and 
its  relation  with  the  body  of  which  it  is  the  informing  soul.  The 
one  is  not  like  to  the  other,  but  omnipresent  in  the  other,  the  soul 
in  the  body.  Even  so  God  is  not  like  unto  the  world,  but  is  in  the 
world  as  its  cause,  law,  and  goal.  Secondly,  a  test  of  the  matter 
proclaims  this.  I  mean  in  this  way.  With  the  postulate  God  the 
whole  world  becomes  clearer,  more  intelligible.  If  he  interpene- 
trates and  inspires  it  as  unitary  and  perfect  order,  then  I  can  under- 
stand that  through  the  ages — if  you  will,  through  the  processes  of 
descent  and  development  according  to  Darwin's  teaching — spirit 
ever  manifests  itself.  Out  of  spirit  is  produced  life  and  the  spirit 
of  man.  Without  this  divine  spirit  the  appearance  of  life  out  of 
protoplasmic  material  is  for  me  an  insoluble  riddle,  a  piece  of 
magic.  How  out  of  mere  mechanism,  left  to  itself,  life  could  origi- 
nate, let  him  understand  who  can.  Only  when  a  chain  is  affirmed 
which  winds  itself  over  and  around  the  atoms,  and  links  them  to- 
gether, does  there  dawn  upon  us  an  intelligible  world  of  life  and 
spiritual  phenomena.  This  is  an  assumption  which  by  its  reason- 
ableness and  scientific  character  may  well  maintain  itself  by  the 
side  of  a  pretentious  materialism.  The  religious  sentiment — "Of 
him  and  through  him,  and  to  him  are  all  things"  (Romans  xi.  36); 
"In  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being"  (Acts  xvii.  28) — 
is  also  in  the  highest  degree  a  scientific  affirmation  which  cannot  be 
denied. 

We  are  still  more  bold,  however,  we  cannot  otherwise,  we  must 
go  on  and  speak  of  a  just  and  holy  God, — yes,  of  a  God  of  love,  of  a 
loving  and  beloved  heavenly  Father,  to  whom  we  may  pray.  We 
may  be  told  that  this  is  much  to  include  in  one  affirmation.  True, 
but  we  will  justify  our  faith,  and  explain  our  "Here  stand  I.  I  can- 
not do  otherwise." 

The  higher  our  standpoint,  the  more  embittered  is  the  attack 
made  upon  us  by  the  champions  of  the  so-called  mechanical  or 
materialistic  theory  of  the  world-government.  Is  not  the  world 
manifestly  full  of  injustice?    I  recall  all  the  social  wrongs,  the  out- 


365 

rages  committed  by  great  nations  against  weaker  ones,  the  indi- 
vidual crimes  against  the  life,  property,  and  honor  of  individuals 
Is  there  not  everywhere  a  discrepancy,  in  our  day  no  less  than  in 
Job's,  between  our  ideals  of  justice  and  the  conduct  of  men,  between 
their  moral  desert  and  their  fate  ?  Certainly,  he  who  did  not  freely 
admit  this  would  not  be  of  the  truth.  But  whence  comes,  amidst 
all  these  dark  happenings,  the  indestructible  light  of  the  sense  of 
justice  in  man,  and  his  faith  that  justice  must  triumph  at  any  cost? 
Whence  the  wondrous  power  with  which  the  people  Israel,  with  its 
faith  in  a  God  of  justice  and  righteousness,  maintained  itself  among 
much  stronger  peoples.  Whence  the  elemental  power  with  which 
Jesus'  ideal  of  justice  towards  children,  women,  the  serving  and 
suffering  classes,  has  forced  its  way  in  the  history  of  mankind  down 
to  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  America,  and  beyond  this  to  the  impet- 
uous demands  of  the  social  movements  of  our  day?  Whence  the 
disapproval  by  public  opinion  of  the  war  of  England  against  the 
Boers,  and  the  cruel  wrongs  visited  by  Russia  upon  Finland? 
Whence,  too,  the  wide-spread  satisfaction  in  the  human  mind  when 
it  hears  of  a  single  deed  of  justice?  It  is  because  God,  who  lives 
in  the  conscience  of  the  just,  is  justice  itself,  and  has  implanted 
in  our  conscience  an  unimpeachable  faculty  or  sensorium  for  divin- 
ing what  is  right  and  wrong.  God's  spirit  gives  witness  in  our  spirit 
that  we  are  his  children.  In  the  days  when  the  unrighteous  and 
insane  violence  of  the  dying  Roman  Empire  cried  to  heaven,  God 
called  the  greatest  teacher  of  civil  rights  into  action,  from  whose 
classic  encyclopaedia  of  law,  the  Corpus  Juris,  the  students  of  social 
justice  still  draw  their  inspirations.  Even  from  the  mouth  of  the 
heathen  he  called:  "Be  not  afraid.  I,  God, am  the  just  and  righteous 
One  amid  all  the  injustice  and  waywardness  of  the  world." 

And  God,  furthermore,  approves  himself  to  be  the  Holy  One. 
But  how,  then,  we  are  asked,  can  he  permit  evil  to  exist  ?  How  shall 
we  reconcile  with  his  holiness  the  presence  of  sin  in  the  world? 
The  whole  of  the  manifestation  of  the  ethical  life  of  man  (and  in  this 
consists  the  distinction  between  the  nature  of  man  and  that  of  other 
existing  creatures)  has  for  its  fundamental  condition  the  free  choice 
between  good  and  evil.  Without  this  possibility  there  can  be  no 
morality.  For  this  reason  there  must  be  offences  in  the  world. 
But,  Christ  tells  us,  "woe  to  him  through  whom  they  come!"    In  this 


366 

forced  choice  between  good  and  evil  comes  to  man  that  command, 
"Thou  shalt,"  which  is  none  other  than  the  voice  of  God  in  his 
conscience.  The  wages  of  sin  is  death,  the  annihilation  of  man; 
but  blessed,  in  the  truest  sense,  are  the  pure  in  heart.  Does  not 
the  Holy  One  announce  himself  in  this  condition  of  man's  mind  ? 
Oh,  do  not  err.  God  is  not  mocked.  "  He  who  sows  to  the  flesh 
shall  of  the  flesh  reap  corruption,  but  he  that  sows  to  the  spirit 
shall  of  the  spirit  inherit  eternal  life."  Even  the  materialists  desire 
to  live  morally,  and  train  their  children  according  to  ideals.  But, 
more  than  this,  I  have  an  inner  proof  of  experience  that  God  is 
just  and  holy;  namely,  when  in  the  struggle  against  passion  and 
flesh  I  rise  to  the  freedom  of  the  spirit,  I  feel  myself  near  to  God 
(blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart),  and,  if  I  make  God's  holy  will  my 
own,  then  I  not  only  best  fulfil  my  life  purpose,  but  then  all  the 
human  environment  about  me  feel  the  better  and  more  deeply 
conscious  of  the  purpose  of  their  life.  On  the  other  hand,  any 
departure  on  my  part  from  the  path  of  duty  and  right  becomes  a 
serious  injustice  toward  all  other  men. 

The  greatest  heroes  of  humanity,  before  whom  all  spontaneously 
bow  in  reverence,  are  those  who  love,  the  high-priests  of  human 
sympathy  who  take  into  their  hearts  the  joys  and  sorrows  of  their 
fellow-men.  Oh,  what  a  chosen  band  are  these, — Saint  Francis  of 
Assisi,  Saint  Elizabeth,  Saint  Vincent  de  Paul,  Hermann  Franke, 
Pestalozzi,  Wichern,  Werner,  Damien,  Bodelschwing,  Florence  Night- 
ingale, William  Lloyd  Garrison,  E.  Fry,  Dorothea  Dix,  Lassault,  Dr. 
Thomas  Barnardo,  Miss  Hobhouse,  and  others!  and  in  advance  of 
all  in  light  and  life  stands  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  over  whom  is  the 
Father  in  heaven,  from  whom  he,  the  Son  of  Man,  derives  his  love 
and  tenderness.  "  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them  that  curse  you,  do 
good  to  them  that  hate  you,  pray  for  them  which  revile  and  perse- 
cute you."  Should  you  ask  from  whence  these  men  were  inspired 
to  this  incomprehensible  folly  of  loving  these  unlovable  ones,  they 
would  say  to  you,  "From  God,  who  is  love  itself:  it  is  this  which 
animates  us  without  ceasing. "  Though  creatures,  plants,  animals, 
and  men  destroy  one  another  without  remorse,  these  angels  bring 
us  intelligence  from  a  higher  world.  God,  the  only  reality,  is  love. 
If  I  put  it  to  the  test,  if  in  this  faith  I  conduct  myself  towards  the 
world,  then  the  greatest  and  divinest  is  possible  to  me.    The  proof 


367 

is  ample.  With  the  God  of  love  for  my  helper,  I  can  do  all.  Here 
I  stand,  on  the  firm  basis  of  this  conviction.  To  this  God,  who  is 
spirit,  righteousness,  holiness,  and  love,  his  children  in  all  times 
lift  up  their  hearts  in  prayer,  in  sorrow,  and  in  joy,  and  their  prayer 
becomes  to  them  a  source  of  strength  and  peace.  In  the  face  of  all 
denial  of  the  Godhead,  from  the  sure  foundation  of  the  innermost 
spiritual  experiences  of  all  ages  and  lands,  they  exclaim  with 
Luther:  "Here  stand  I.  I  cannot  do  otherwise.  May  God  help 
me!" 

The  Chairman  next  introduced  Rev.  Christopher  J.  Street,  M.A., 
of  England,  who  spoke  as  follows: — 


368 


THE  RELATION  OF  CHRISTIANITY  TO  RELIGION. 

BY  REV.  CHRISTOPHER  J.  STREET,  M.A.,  LL.B.,  OF  SHEFFIELD, 
ENGLAND. 

Time  was,  and  that  not  so  long  ago,  when  a  title  such  as  I  have 
announced,  would  have  been  hailed  with  derision  by  most  Christian 
people. 

I  can  well  remember  when  it  was  the  fashion  to  classify  "religions," 
as  they  were  called,  into  "true"  and  "false,"  Christianity  being  re- 
garded as  the  only  true  religion  and  all  the  rest  as  false.  The  con- 
temptuous pity  then  expressed  for  the  "heathen"  was  offensive  and 
ungenerous,  utterly  unworthy  of  the  spirit  shown  by  the  Master  and 
the  best  of  his  apostles  in  dealing  with  the  religious  susceptibilities  of 
people  who  thought  not  quite  as  they  did.  The  rebuke  to  the  im- 
petuous Son  of  Thunder  who  wished  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven 
to  consume  the  unfriendly  Samaritans,  and  tried  to  stop  the  good 
work  of  casting  out  evil  spirits  because  it  was  being  done  by  one  who 
"followeth  not  with  us,"  needed  frequent  repetition  in  those  days, 
and  it  is  not  wholly  unnecessary  now:  "Forbid  him  not;  for  he  that  is 
not  against  you  is  for  you."  "Ye  judge  after  the  flesh;  I  judge  no 
man."  The  narrowness  of  Peter,  before  his  soul  was  awakened, 
found  many  imitators,  but  not  the  catholic  spirit  of  the  enlightened 
Peter,  who  had  gained  grace  to  say:  "God  hath  showed  me  that  I 
should  not  call  any  man  common  or  unclean.  Of  a  truth  I  perceive 
that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons;  but  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth 
him  and  worketh  righteousness  is  accepted  with  him."  And  the  broad- 
minded  oration  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  on  Mars'  Hill  might 
never  have  been  spoken,  so  far  as  the  effect  on  the  average  Christian 
conscience  was  concerned.  "God  that  made  the  world  and  all  things 
therein,  He,  being  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  dwelleth  not  in  temples 
made  with  hands,  neither  is  He  served  by  men's  hands  as  though  He 
needed  anything,  seeing  He  himself  giveth  to  all  life  and  breath  and  all 
things;  and  He  made  of  one  every  nation  of  men  to  dwell  on  all  the 


369 

face  of  the  earth,  having  determined  their  appointed  seasons  and  the 
bounds  of  their  habitation;  that  they  should  seek  the  Lord,  if  haply 
they  might  feel  after  Him,  and  find  Him,  though  He  be  not  far  from 
every  one  of  us:  for  in  Him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being; 
as  certain  of  your  own  poets  have  said,  For  we  are  also  His 
offspring." 

But  the  days  of  that  old  and  objectionable  narrowness  and  spiritual 
conceit  (which  is  the  worst  of  all  conceits)  are  past — gone,  I  trust,  for- 
ever from  intelligent  Christianity;  and  there  is  better  promise  to-day 
of  a  return  to  the  pure  and  unadulterated  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  than 
in  any  of  the  generations  gone  by.  All  that  is  good  and  true  in  the 
"New  Theology"  is  old  as  Christianity  itself,  and  what  is  mistaken 
and  foolish  will  pass  away,  as  all  kindred  errors  have  done.  But 
meanwhile,  let  us  welcome  every  bold  and  earnest  prophet,  however 
we  may  differ  from  some  of  his  teaching,  so  long  as  he  proclaims  the 
Immanent  God  and  helps  to  make  humanity  conscious  of  its  essential 
divinity. 

A  Christianity  like  that  of  Jesus  so  abounds  in  charity  and  sym- 
pathetic understanding  of  the  greatness  of  truth  and  the  varied  wants 
of  human  hearts  that  no  admonition  as  to  tolerance  is  necessary. 
The  more  clearly  we  know,  the  less  we  shall  criticise  and  the  deeper 
will  be  our  understanding.  But  a  narrower  Christianity  sometimes 
meets  with  a  deserved,  if  gentle,  rebuke  from  one  whom  it  may  regard 
as  a  sceptic  or  agnostic,  as  when,  e.g.,  Mr.  John  Morley  writes: — 
"Tolerance  is  far  more  than  the  abandonment  of  civil  usurpations 
over  conscience.  It  is  a  lesson  often  needed  quite  as  much  in  the 
hearts  of  a  minority  as  of  a  majority.  Tolerance  means  reverence  for 
all  the  possibilities  of  Truth;  it  means  acknowledgment  that  she 
dwells  in  diverse  mansions,  and  wears  vestures  of  many  colors,  and 
speaks  in  strange  tongues;  it  means  frank  respect  for  freedom  of 
indwelling  conscience  against  mechanic  forms,  official  conventions, 
social  force;  it  means  the  charity  that  is  greater  than  even  faith  and 
hope." 

What  is  it  that  has  made  such  a  sweeping  change  in  the  bearing  of 
the  thoughtful  portion  of  the  Christian  Church  toward  the  non- 
Christian  manifestations  of  the  religious  spirit  ?  Many  causes  have 
undoubtedly  contributed  to  this  cheering  and  satisfactory  result.  There 
has  been  much  natural  growth  and  development  from  within.    The 


37° 

essential  spirit  of  Christianity  has  asserted  itself  as  against  all  denomi- 
nationalisms  and  ecclesiasticisms,  and  made  thinking  men  under- 
stand that  all  humanity  is  one,  and  that  the  Father  is  always  seeking 
His  children  in  order  that  He  may  save  them.  But  the  chief  factor 
making  for  this  better  state  of  things  has  been  the  wealth  of  new 
knowledge  about  the  faith  of  other  peoples  which  has  been  poured 
upon  us — knowledge  whose  credentials  are  unimpeachable,  coming  as 
it  does  from  close  study  given  by  sympathetic  and  scholarly  minds, 
dealing  with  facts  in  a  purely  scientific  spirit,  and  anxious  only  to 
ascertain  and  announce  the  truth.  For  the  first  time  it  has  been 
possible,  and  is  now  being  generally  found  by  thoughtful  students  to 
be  desirable,  to  apply  scientific  methods  and  tests  to  the  problems  of 
religious  phenomena,  as  they  are  presented  in  countless  phases  and 
forms  all  the  world  over.  Thus  has  grown  up  the  science  of  Com- 
parative Religion,  and  it  has  become  practicable,  and  most  inter- 
esting and  illuminating,  to  study  the  various  manifestations  of  the 
religious  spirit  together,  enabling  us  to  judge,  as  never  before,  of  the 
degrees  of  merit  in  the  different  systems  of  faith  which  humanity 
has  upreared,  and  to  discern  an  underlying  unity  which  the  dust  of 
the  strife  of  sectarians  has  hitherto  obscured. 

One  thing  has  been  made  perfectly  clear  by  this  new  knowledge 
and  the  scientific  application  of  it;  namely,  that  Christianity  is  one 
thing,  and  Religion  is  something  larger  and  more  comprehensive.  It 
is  no  longer  possible  for  the  thoughtful  man,  however  devout  a  Chris- 
tian he  may  be,  to  say  or  to  think  that  the  terms  "Christianity"  and 
"Religion"  are  synonymous  and  coextensive.  He  cannot  refuse  to 
see  that  much  precious  Religion  exists  outside  of  the  Christian  circle 
of  influence.  He  cannot  any  longer  divide  "religions"  into  "true" 
and  "false,"  for  he  sees  that  there  is  and  must  be  truth  in  all.  He 
cannot  even  speak,  except  carelessly,  of  "religions"  at  all;  for  he  has 
learnt  the  great  and  liberalizing  truth  that  Religion  is  One,  though  its 
manifestations  and  expressions  are  full  of  variety.  He  has  come  to 
see  that  the  Church  of  God  is  greater  than  all  the  churches,  stands 
high  above  their  dogmatisms  and  half-truths,  comprehends  them 
all  in  spite  of  their  arbitrary  dividing  lines,  and  even  includes  multi- 
tudes whom  they  have  ignored  or  cast  out. 

The  Church  which  is  truly  Catholic  comprehends  every  earnest 
worshipper,  and  excludes  no  manifestation  of  reverence,  whatever 


37i 

intellectual  shape  it  may  assume.  The  spirit  of  the  living  God  can 
never  be  restrained  within  ecclesiastical  demarcations.  Wherever  the 
human  spirit  reaches  out  in  aspiration  and  devoutness,  a  ready  re- 
sponse of  the  Divine  Nature  is  found. 

I  find  it  easier  to  define  Christianity  to  my  own  satisfaction  than  to 
define  Religion,  which  is  perhaps  natural.  It  is  the  larger  truths  that 
are  hardest  to  summarize  in  a  phrase.  The  nearer  they  approach 
infinity,  the  less  possible  is  it  for  them  to  be  defined.  Christianity  is 
a  particular  manifestation  of  the  religious  spirit  which  is  common  to 
all  mankind.  It  may  be  simply  and  fairly  defined,  I  think,  as  "the 
religion  of  Jesus." 

But,  when  it  comes  to  defining  Religion,  the  real  difficulty  begins. 
How  many  books  have  I  opened  in  hope  for  guidance  in  this  matter, 
only  to  turn  away  unsatisfied  and  disappointed!  How  many  great 
teachers,  to  whom  one  looks  with  affection  or  reverence,  have  failed 
completely  in  this  respect!  Religion  is  "those  perceptions  of  the  In- 
finite which  are  able  to  influence  the  moral  character  of  man,"  says 
Max  Miiller.  According  to  Frances  Power  Cobbe  it  is  "the  sense  of 
absolute  dependence,  united  with  the  sense  of  absolute  moral  alleg- 
iance; the  Being  on  whom  we  depend  being  recognized  as  possessing 
the  Right  to  claim,  as  well  as  the  Power  to  enforce,  our  absolute  obedi- 
ence." "By  Religion,"  says  my  own  beloved  teacher,  James  Marti- 
neau,  "I  understand  the  belief  and  worship  of  Supreme  Mind  and 
Will,  directing  the  Universe  and  holding  moral  relations  with  life." 
"The  religious  element  first  manifests  itself  in  our  consciousness  by  a 
feeling  of  need,  of  want;  in  one  word,  by  a  sense  of  dependence,"  says 
Theodore  Parker,  who  at  the  outset  of  his  ministry  wrote,  "I  deter- 
mined to  preach  nothing  as  Religion  which  I  had  not  experienced  in- 
wardly and  made  my  own,  knowing  it  by  heart."  "Religion,"  says 
Professor  Flint,  "is  man's  communion  with  what  he  believes  to  be 
a  god  of  gods ;  his  sense  of  relationship  to  and  dependence  on  a  higher 
and  mysterious  agency,  with  all  the  thoughts,  emotions,  and  actions 
which  proceed  therefrom."  Count  d'Alviella  defines  it  as  "the  con- 
ception man  forms  of  his  relations  with  the  superhuman  and  mysteri- 
ous powers  on  which  he  believes  himself  to  depend."  "Religion," 
says  Bishop  Creighton,  "means  the  knowledge  of  our  destiny  and  of 
the  means  of  fulfilling  it."  Professor  Bradley,  in  hisGifford  Lectures 
last  February,  said,  "It  is  an  attitude  or  activity  of  the  whole  soul 


372 

or  personality,  containing  a  mode  of  belief  about  God  and  about  the 
self  and  the  world  in  our  relation  to  Him,  a  mode  of  feeling  concern- 
ing Him,  a  direction  of  the  will  towards  Him,  or  a  union  of  the  will 
with  His  will, — no  one  of  these  alone  or  merely  side  by  side  with  the 
others."  "Religion,"  says  Dr.  Minot  Savage,  "is  the  search  for  the 
secret  of  life." 

None  of  these  definitions  satisfy  me.  My  own  statement  of  the 
case  usually  is  that  Religion  is  the  reaching  out  of  man's  spirit  to  God, 
the  connecting  link  between  earth  and  heaven.  But  I  realize  the 
inadequacy  of  the  definition.  The  one  which  really  commends  itself 
to  me  as  the  most  poetical  and  beautiful  is  that  given  at  the  very  end 
of  H.  Fielding  Hall's  remarkable  book,  "The  Hearts  of  Men":  "Re- 
ligion is  the  music  of  the  Infinite  echoed  from  the  hearts  of  men." 

The  fact  of  man's  religious  tendency  is  a  necessary  corollary  of  his 
divine  origin:  the  method  and  extent  of  its  development  depend 
chiefly  on  nationality  and  age.  The  American,  like  the  Englishman, 
is  born  to  be  a  Christian,  the  Turk  or  Arab  to  be  a  Mohammedan,  the 
Burmese  to  be  a  Buddhist.  Parsee  and  Jew,  Brahman  and  Shin- 
toist,  are  such  because  their  conditions  have  made  them  what  they  are. 
But  each  expresses  religion  in  his  own  way;  and,  whatever  his  form  of 
faith,  his  fervor  and  zeal,  his  sincerity  and  devoutness  are  equally 
manifest.  A  man's  religion  is  his  most  priceless  possession.  There 
is  nothing  he  will  not  sacrifice  for  it  when  it  has  got  a  real  hold  of  him. 
There  is  a  strong  enthusiasm  felt  somewhere  for  every  form  of  religion; 
and  the  strange  thing  is  that  the  enthusiasm  of  one  phase  of  it  usually 
scorns  the  enthusiasm  of  every  other. 

All  religion  comes  to  meet  a  deep  human  need:  it  springs  from  the 
fountains  of  the  heart  and  wells  up  in  strong  waves  of  feeling.  When 
religious  susceptibilities  are  touched,  all  is  Emotion, — a  sufficient 
warning  that  Reason  alone,  invaluable  gift  of  God  as  it  is,  is  not 
enough  to  meet  human  needs.  Religion  may  be  divorced  from 
reason,  and,  alas!  it  often  is;  but  unspeakably  beautiful  is  the  perfect 
combination  and  harmony  of  Reason  and  Emotion,  blending  in  perfect 
expression  of  the  deepest  wants  of  the  soul.  Faiths  are  built  up  from 
feeling,  but  they  need  to  be  guided  and  controlled  by  intelligence 
before  they  can  stand  the  test  of  true  worth.  There  is  no  such  stimu- 
lus to  life  as  religion.  It  intensifies  a  man's  power  over  himself  and 
.<ver  others.     It  transforms  and  dignifies  the  whole  nature. 


PROF.  MARTIN  RADE,  D.D. 
Marburg,  Germany 


PROF.  OTTO  PFLEIDERER,  D.D. 
Berlin,  Germany 


<!■  -  "V'tyfl££?5' 

«  v  ■;  'IBP1      w^l 

m 

it. 

REV.  MAX.  FISCHER,  D.D. 
Berlin,  Germany 


PROF.  RUDOLF  EUCKEN,  D.Phil. 
Jena,  Germany 


>"  THE 


OF 


373 

It  is  clear  gain  when  our  minds  are  sufficiently  broadened  to  enable 
us  to  realize  that  no  religion  is  false,  however  inadequate  it  may  seem 
to  us;  that  no  idolatry  in  itself  is  wicked,  but  simply  an  incomplete 
and  childish  attempt  to  express  the  worshipping  spirit ;  that  no  doctrine 
of  theology  is  untrue,  merely  an  imperfect  guess  at  the  truth.  Our 
own  favorite  doctrines  are  nothing  more;  and  never  a  man  was  born 
who  knew,  or  could  know,  the  whole  trutn  of  God.  Some  of  our 
worship  is  perchance  idolatry,  too.  Certainly,  it  would  seem  so  to  men 
who  approach  God  in  other  ways.  The  religion  which  we  love  with 
all  our  hearts  appears  to  earnest  and  thoughtful  men,  born  and  reared 
under  other  influences,  to  be  pernicious  and  fatally  false;  yet  we  know 
that  it  is  not  so,  any  more  than  their  own  faith  is  without  beauty  and 
truth  to  support  it.  "Every  religion,"  says  Max  Mtiller,  "even  the 
most  imperfect  and  degraded,  has  something  that  ought  to  be  sacred 
to  us,  for  there  is  in  all  religions  a  secret  yearning  after  the  true, 
though  unknown,  God.  Whether  we  see  the  Papuan  squatting  in 
dumb  meditation  before  his  fetich,  or  whether  we  listen  to  Firdusi 
exclaiming,  'The  height  and  the  depth  of  the  whole  world  have  their 
centre  in  Thee,  O  my  God :  I  do  not  know  Thee  what  Thou  art,  but 
I  know  that  Thou  art  what  Thou  alone  canst  be,'  we  ought  to  feel 
that  the  place  whereon  we  stand  is  holy  ground." 

It  is  simply  a  question  of  degree  between  one  form  of  faith  and 
another,  between  one  phase  of  religion  and  another,  and  each  must 
stand  the  fair  test  of  comparison.  Jesus  must  be  measured  with  the 
founders  of  other  world  systems ;  our  Bible  must  take  its  place  beside 
the  other  Bibles  of  the  world;  the  best  will  plead  its  own  cause.  No 
thunder- voice  from  Sinai  is  necessary  to  proclaim,  "This  is  the  Word 
of  God."  If  it  is  a  divine  word,  it  will  speak  for  itself  and  make  its 
influence  felt.  No  mighty  miracle  is  needed  to  proclaim  the  divine 
appointment  and  commission  of  the  prophet:  his  preaching  will  make 
it  plain.  The  Saviour  of  the  world  requires  no  herald  angels:  he  will 
save, — the  best  proof  of  his  divine  warrant. 

Only  in  full  and  open  comparison  with  other  faiths  will  the  beauty 
of  the  best  appear.  Whosoever  is  convinced  of  the  supreme  dignity 
of  his  own  Lord  and  Master  need  fear  no  rivalry  with  any  other: 
rather  will  he  court  comparison.  Indeed,  between  the  founders  and 
leaders  of  faith  there  would  and  could  be  no  rivalry:  they  were  each 
developing  the  best  thought  and  life  of  their  own  age  and  race.    The 


374 

rivalry  has  arisen  among  the  disciples,  unable  to  rise  to  the  height  of 
their  Master's  spiritual  teaching,  and  diverting  attention  from  the 
things  that  really  matter  to  the  things  that  are  of  little  moment.  The 
true  value  of  a  Religion  or  a  Bible,  or  a  Christ  will  only  emerge  when 
they  are  honestly  compared  with  all  other  claimants  for  our  regard 
and  veneration. 

No,  the  conflicts  and  jealousies  have  not  been  among  the  masters, 
but  among  the  followers,  who  have  too  often  been  mere  camp-fol- 
lowers. Men  have  wrangled  about  religion,  and  lost  hold  of  the 
religious  spirit  in  doing  so.  They  have  eagerly  cast  each  other  out  of 
the  synagogue,  and  denied  to  the  heathen  and  the  heretic  the  very 
name  of  Religion;  but  their  foolish  and  bigoted  denials  have  not 
altered  facts.  There  is,  after  all,  but  One  Religion,  and  that  is  the 
upward  striving  of  the  human  soul  towards  the  Divine,  whether  it 
recognizes  it  to  be  such  or  not.  There  is  much  unconscious  religion 
in  the  world,  happily.  Perhaps  the  more  unconscious  it  is,  the  better: 
it  will  not  be  spoilt  by  self-laudation.  The  manifestations  of  that 
Divine  Leading  which  we  term  Religion  are  innumerable  and  bound- 
less in  variety. 

Surely,  it  gives  us  a  higher  view  of  God  when  we  are  generous  (or 
shall  we  say  just  and  sensible  ?)  enough  to  realize  this  larger  truth.  Is 
it  not  glorious  gain  to  feel  that  no  age  or  race  has  been  left  without 
contact  and  communion  with  the  Most  High  ?  The  vision  has  been 
proportioned  to  the  capacity  for  sight:  the  word  has  been  appro- 
priate to  the  immediate  need.  James  Russell  Lowell  most  aptly 
expresses  the  great  truth  which  the  science  of  Comparative  Religion 
is  making  clear  to  the  world  when  he  says: — 

"  God  sends  His  teachers  unto  every  age, 
To  every  clime,  and  every  race  of  men, 
With  revelations  fitted  to  their  growth 
And  shape  of  mind,  nor  gives  the  realm  of  Truth 
Into  the  selfish  rule  of  one  sole  race: 
Therefore  each  form  of  worship  that  hath  swayed 
The  life  of  man,  and  given  it  to  grasp 
The  master-key  of  knowledge,  reverence, 
Enfolds  some  germs  of  goodness  and  of  right; 
Else  never  had  the  eager  soul,  which  loathes 
The  slothful  down  of  pampered  ignorance, 
Found  in  it  even  a  moment's  fitful  rest." 


375 

There  is  not  less  devoutness  among  the  Brahmans  or  Mohamme- 
dans than  we  can  find  in  our  companies  of  Christian  believers: 
does  God  think  less  of  their  worship  and  reverence  than  of  ours? 
The  ethical  theism  of  the  Jew  is  as  firm  and  strong  to-day  as  it  was 
in  the  splendid  prophets  who  redeemed  his  race  from  mere  cere- 
monialism and  lip-service:  is  it  less  acceptable  to  the  Infinite  Good- 
ness than  the  tribute  of  virtue  and  service  offered  in  the  name  of 
Christ?  Naturally,  we  love  our  own  best:  we  believe  our  own  faith 
to  be  the  highest  possible,  or  we  should  not  hold  it;  but  we  must 
be  appreciative  and  sympathetic  to  the  spiritual  strivings  of  others 
who  are  no  less  sincere  than  we  endeavor  to  be. 

What  matters  it  that  some  faiths  seem  still  to  be  in  their  infancy  or 
early  childhood  ?  It  is  a  phase  through  which  the  highest  and  best- 
developed  have  had  to  pass  before  they  attained  to  the  glory  of  full- 
grown  manhood.  All  religion  probably  began  in  fear,  displaying 
itself  first  in  a  desire  to  placate  the  higher  powers,  to  get  them  on  the 
side  of  the  worshipper  rather  than  against  him.  What  then ?  "The 
fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of  wisdom,"  and  only  the  beginning. 
It  was  a  child's  motive  that  swayed  the  primitive  worshipper,  no 
doubt:  it  is  often  no  more  than  a  child's  motive  which  prompts  the 
Christian  worshipper  to-day.  But  the  child  will  become  a  man,  and 
put  away  childish  things;  and  we  shall  not  help  his  development  by 
sneering  at  him  or  chiding  him,  or  turning  him  out  of  the  worshipping 
assembly  or  refusing  to  accept  his  tribute  as  religion  at  all.  Not  such 
was  the  attitude  of  Jesus,  nor  is  it  the  right  attitude  for  his  modern 
disciples,  who  have  the  less  excuse  for  narrowness  because  to  them 
an  ampler  knowledge  of  God  has  been  vouchsafed.  God  is  revealing 
himself  to  our  generation  as  never  before.  The  pity  of  it,  if  we  will  not 
accept  the  vision,  and  understand  the  majestic  truth  that  He  is,  and 
has  ever  been,  within  the  heart  and  life  of  all  His  humanity! 

And  a  higher  and  truer  view  of  humanity  itself  comes  to  us  when, 
in  view  of  the  facts  presented  by  the  study  of  Comparative  Religion, 
we  come  to  see  that  man,  always  and  everywhere,  is  the  child  of  God, 
dear  to  the  Father's  heart  and  with  a  spark  of  heavenly  fire  within. 
All  through  the  history  of  mankind  there  has  been  the  Divine  appeal ; 
and  gradually,  with  growing  appreciation  of  its  mystic  meaning,  has 
come  the  human  response.  The  Divine  Nature  unceasingly  calls  to 
that  which  in  rising  man  is  akin  to  itself:  Human  Nature,  very  slowly 


376 

and  in  stumbling  fashion,  learns  its  opportunity  and  ability,  and 
painfully  reaches  up  to  the  Divine.  And  so  the  story  of  the  world  is 
written, — "a  blundering  quest  for  God,"  if  you  will,  but  not  in  the 
sense  that  Mr.  R.  J.  Campbell  used  the  phrase, — a  progressive  develop- 
ment of  human  power  and  possibility,  a  nearer  approach  to  the  divine 
intention  and  will.  Religion  is  the  impelling  power,  the  stimulus,  the 
kindling  fire.  And,  as  F.  W.  Newman  wisely  said,  "True  religion 
wages  no  abstract  war  against  any  part  of  man,  but  gives  to  each  part 
its  due  subordination  or  supremacy,  and  breathes  sweetness  and 
purity  through  all." 

Christianity  itself  becomes  a  richer,  larger,  more  generous  thing 
when  this  more  cosmopolitan  view  of  religion  is  taken.  The  latest 
census  of  the  British  Empire  indicates  that  King  Edward  has  in  Asia 
more  than  300  millions  of  subjects,  in  America  7$  millions,  in  Africa 
about  43  millions,  in  Australasia  over  5  millions,  and  in  Europe  over 
42  millions.  Classifying  these  broadly  as  regards  religious  faith, 
there  are  only  58  millions  of  Christians  in  the  King's  dominions,  as 
against  208  millions  of  Hindus,  94  millions  of  Mohammedans,  12 
millions  of  Buddhists,  and  23  millions  of  Parsees,  Jews,  and  others, 
including  some  very  primitive  manifestations  of  the  religious  spirit. 
That  is  to  say,  that  only  one  in  seven  British  subjects  is  Christian  of 
any  kind. 

These  figures  may  be  open  to  some  challenge,  but  they  are  not 
likely  to  be  very  seriously  wrong,  and  they  should  give  us  pause  for 
reflection.  After  personal  contact  with  the  cultured  and  devout 
Hindu  or  Moslem  and  too  frequent  and  painful  association  with 
shallow  dogmatists  who  take  the  Christian  name,  but  seldom  use  their 
brains  to  think  or  their  hearts  to  be  charitable,  it  ceases  to  be  a  wonder 
that  the  contemplative  Hindu  is  repelled  by  the  ignorant  claims  and 
practices  of  an  offensive  Christianity,  or  that  the  sober  and  honest 
Turk  is  disgusted  with  the  unworthy  Christians  of  the  Levant.  Of 
course,  it  is  not  the  Christianity  that  is  to  blame  for  this  unfortunate 
repulsion,  but  the  shameful  perversion  of  Christianity  which  is  made 
into  a  constant  object-lesson  for  them.  So  we  are  not  to  judge  the 
religion  of  the  Koran  or  of  the  Vedas  by  the  degenerate  types  often 
presented  to  us.  Each  form  of  religion  must  be  judged  by  its  best 
expression;  and  then  it  is  wonderful,  soul-piercing,  how  much  alike 
they  are  in  the  great  essentials.    There  is  more  community  of  thought 


377 

and  spirit  between  the  best  of  Christianity  and  the  best  of  Islam  or 
Buddhism  than  between  the  best  and  worst  of  Christianity.  There 
is  more  sympathy  between  the  authors  of  "Contentio  Veritatis"  and 
the  leaders  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  of  India  than  between  them  and  the 
devotees  of  the  debased  superstition  of  the  Greek  Church.  Ram- 
mohun  Roy  and  Ramakrishna,  Keshub  Chunder  Sen  and  Protap 
Chunder  Mozoomdar,  are  nearer  in  faith  and  feeling  to  any  Liberal 
Christian  than  is  the  head  of  a  Jesuit  College  or  the  Catholikos  of 
the  Armenian  Church  or  even  the  humble  Plymouth  Brother.  We 
must  not  be  the  deluded  creatures  of  a  name. 

This  comprehensiveness  of  view,  this  generosity  of  recognition  of 
religion  as  the  human  attempt  to  reach  the  Divine,  will  not  interfere 
with  our  private  interpretation  of  the  great  principles  for  which 
historic  Christianity  has  stood,  or  diminish  our  loyalty  to  it  in  the 
least.  But  the  principles  will  be  amplified  beyond  our  earlier  thought : 
we  shall  see  that  our  faith  was  greater  than  we  knew.  Do  you  ask, 
Where  is  the  place  left  for  Revelation  ?  Ask  rather  where  that  place 
is  not.  God  has  always  been  revealing  himself  to  those  who  were  able 
to  see  the  marks  of  His  presence.  Has  Inspiration  gone,  do  you  ask? 
Have  you  not  learnt  that  it  began  when  man  was  yet  in  his  infancy, 
and  will  remain  as  a  growing  influence  through  the  whole  of  his  adult 
life?  What  becomes  of  the  Incarnation,  think  you?  Does  the 
Divine  Indwelling  in  Jesus,  then,  become  any  the  less  true  or  significant 
if  you  also  admit  that  God  was  in  Buddha  and  Zoroaster,  and  in  the 
Bab,  and  that  His  spirit  is  present  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  us  all  ? 
Does  not  the  larger  outlook  make  it  seem  more  than  ever  true  that  we 
are  the  temple  of  the  Living  God,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelleth  in 
us,  and  that  the  temple  of  God  is  holy,  which  temple  we  are  ? 

Religion  is  no  private  demesne,  but  a  public  garden,  wherein  every 
man  may  walk  freely,  gather  rosebuds  that  will  not  wither,  and  taste 
of  fruits  neither  forbidden  nor  disappointing.  Christianity,  as  it  was  in 
Jesus,  is  the  choicest  portion  of  that  wonderful  garden  where  the  sun 
shines  brightest  and  the  flowers  smell  sweetest.  Yet  every  avenue 
leads  to  some  desirable  goal,  every  meadow  attracts  some  straying 
foot,  every  bank  has  its  restful  invitation,  every  tree  its  meed  of  welcome 
shade.  Throughout  the  garden  the  loving  care  and  touch  of  the  great 
Master  Gardener  are  everywhere  seen,  and  His  welcome  is  felt  by  each 
timid  visitant  wherever  he  may  wander.    And  the  heart  of  every 


378 

honored  and  understanding  guest  beats  responsive  to  that  of  his 
Master.  In  His  name  an  ungrudging  greeting  is  given  to  all  who, 
from  the  dusty  highways  and  busy  thoroughfares  of  worldly  life,  find 
entrance  into  the  grateful  garden  of  the  Lord. 

At  the  close  of  these  addresses  an  interesting  discussion  took  place. 
Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer  criticised  incidentally  the  "antiquated  liturgies" 
he  had  found  in  use,  even  in  Unitarian  churches,  in  this  country. 
Professor  Dr.  Francis  G.  Peabody,  of  Harvard  University,  main- 
tained that  the  renaissance  of  rational  religion  must  be  accompanied 
and  guided  by  a  rational  theology,  the  need  of  thinking  men  in  a 
thinking  age.  Professor  Dr.  George  F.  Moore  made  some  friendly 
criticisms  on  Rev.  Mr.  Street's  paper,  and  upheld  the  claims  of  Chris- 
tianity as  a  Universal  Religion.  Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant,  of  London, 
and  Miss  Mary  Richmond,  of  New  Zealand,  also  made  brief  remarks. 
It  is  to  be  regretted  that  these  informal  addresses  were  not  reported. 

The  papers  which  follow  were  read  at  other  meetings  of  the  Con- 
gress, but  are  inserted  here,  since  by  their  topics  and  treatment  they 
belong  to  this  department.* 

Professor  Dr.  Rudolf  Eucken,  of  the  University  of  Jena,  Germany, 
unable  to  appear  in  person,  sent  the  paper  he  had  prepared  for  the 
Congress,  which  was  read  by  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte. 

•To  complete  the  contribution  made  at  this  Congress  to  religious  history  and  philosophy,  the 
notable  papers  of  Professors  Pfleiderer,  Montet,  and  Revs.  Gordon,  Bowie,  Cope,  Webster,  Andre", 
and  others,  printed  elsewhere  in  this  volume,  should  be  included. 


379 


WHAT  DOES  A  FREE  CHRISTIANITY  REQUIRE 
IN  ORDER  TO  BECOME  VICTORIOUS? 

BY  PROFESSOR  RUDOLF  EUCKEN,  DR.  PHDL.,  UNTVERSITY  OF  JENA. 

In  the  development  and  advocacy  of  a  free  Christianity  much 
intellectual  power  is  enlisted,  many  eminent  persons  have  dedicated 
their  life-work  to  this  cause,  and  indisputably,  in  the  domain  of 
knowledge,  this  movement  is  in  the  lead  to-day.  In  society  consid- 
ered as  a  whole,  however,  and  in  the  shaping  of  general  conditions, 
it  is  still  strongly  in  the  minority.  Here  it  must  still  struggle  hard 
for  the  recognition  of  its  right  to  exist.  Between  its  enrolment  of 
intellectual  ability  and  its  acceptance  by  mankind  there  is  still  a 
great  disproportion.  What  can  be  done  to  lessen  this  disparity? 
What  can  we  on  our  part  contribute  to  make  a  free  Christianity 
victorious  ? 

The  question  may  be  approached  from  different  points  of  view. 
The  philosopher  may  be  permitted  to  set  aside  all  considerations  of 
a  practical  and  political  nature,  and  to  limit  himself  wholly  to  its 
inward  aspects,  its  intellectual  and  spiritual  content.  We  will  ask 
what  may  occur  in  the  inner  development  of  our  movement  to  bring 
us  nearer  the  desired  goal.  We  shall,  in  so  doing,  have  to  exercise 
some  self-criticism,  and  have  to  acknowledge  much  in  our  under- 
takings as  crude  and  immature.  But  such  an  honest  self -scrutiny, 
based  as  it  is  on  a  firm  faith  in  our  own  good  right  to  be,  should  be 
more  useful  to  our  cause  than  a  self-satisfied  optimism,  than  to  claim 
as  completed  that  which  is  still  in  the  midst  of  work  and  flow. 

Whatever  treatment  we  may  purpose  giving  certain  problems  in 
the  course  of  our  inquiry,  all  alike  are  subject  to  one  general  con- 
sideration. We  who  strive  for  a  freer  form  of  religion  and  of 
Christianity  too  often  content  ourselves  with  mere  criticism  and 
negation.  We  do  not  work  out  sufficiently  the  positive  element 
in  our  convictions,  and  because  of   this  we  incur  the  danger  of 


3&> 

not  giving  the  matter  the  full  depth  of  which  it  is  capable,  and 
hence  of  not  imparting  to  men  the  irresistible  power  and  glow 
which  a  religious  movement  of  grand  style  demands.  It  is,  indeed, 
impossible  for  us  to  refrain  from  energetic  criticism  and  denial.  We 
have,  first,  to  make  a  pathway  for  ourselves.  We  feel  ourselves  in 
many  respects  unsatisfied  with  the  form  in  which  religious  truth 
has  been  presented.  In  such  a  case  all  endeavors  to  veil  from 
sight  existing  conditions  are  an  evil.  Our  Yea  cannot  be  clear 
and  effectual  if  it  does  not  bear  within  it  a  distinct  Nay.  But 
this  Nay,  indispensable  as  it  is,  must  not  hold  us  captive.  Neither 
now  or  ever  should  we  remain  a  mere  movement  in  opposition.  For 
in  all  times  it  was  the  positive  affirmation  which  was  decisive  and 
constructive.  The  more  we  make  it  apparent  that  our  convictions 
are  able  to  lead  on  with  positiveness,  and  to  confirm  and  deepen 
the  life  of  man,  the  sooner  we  may  hope  for  an  effective  influence 
on  mankind,  and  the  more  perfect  will  be  our  victory. 

From  this  point  of  view  let  it  be  shown  by  certain  instances  that 
while  the  desire  for  a  free  Christianity  in  some  of  the  demands  it 
is  compelled  to  make  is  accompanied  by  no  slight  dangers,  it  yet 
bears  within  itself  the  ability  to  overcome  these  dangers  and  to  turn 
them  to  the  good. 

i.  The  first  point  of  collision  with  the  old  school  of  thought  con- 
cerns the  place  and  worth  of  the  individual.  We  demand  more 
freedom,  more  self-determination,  a  more  characteristic  testimony 
on  the  part  of  the  individual.  We  ask  this  not  only  because  without 
it  nothing  new  can  develop  and  persist.  We  require  it,  above  all, 
because  it  belongs  to  the  full  inwardness  and  full  sincerity  of  life, 
such  as  a  religion  of  the  spirit  must  demand.  But  at  the  same  time 
we  do  not  conceal  from  ourselves  the  complication  which  can  arise 
from  such  a  strengthening  of  the  individual.  The  individual  may 
sever  himself,  as  far  as  possible,  from  all  his  connections,  and  think 
himself  all  the  greater  the  more  he  places  himself  in  opposition  to 
them.  He  can  make  prominent  this  differentiation,  and  thus  exer- 
cise a  repellent  influence.  Very  easily  the  rank  growths  of  reflection 
and  the  subjective  reason  may  choke  the  capacity  for  positive  pro- 
duction. In  such  a  case  the  emphasis  laid  upon  individualism  will 
tend  to  mere  negation  and  dissolution.  There  is  danger  that  life 
will  be  broken  into  splinters,  and  disintegrate  into  innumerable 


3& 

separate  and  distinct  circles.  Easily,  then,  those  may  turn  against 
each  other  who  ought  mutually  to  support  each  other.  Who  would 
dispute  that  the  movement  for  a  freer  development  of  religion  has 
often  had  as  a  consequence  such  manifestations  ?  But  we  emphati- 
cally deny  that  it  stands  helpless  in  the  face  of  such  dangers  or  that 
it  cannot,  of  its  own  power,  overcome  them.  For  these  dubious 
and  wrong-headed  consequences  did  not  arise  from  the  fact  that 
the  movement  was  originated  by  the  individual,  but  rather  from 
this,  that  it  did  not  think  greatly  enough  of  the  individual;  that  it 
stood  fast  before  his  first  appearance,  his  proximate  existence,  instead 
of  pursuing  it  into  those  depths  where  inner  connections  become 
evident  in  the  individual  and  lift  him  above  mere  nature.  This 
distinguishes  man  as  a  spiritual  being,  that  here  the  separate  life 
elements  do  not  merely  come  in  contact  with  each  other  externally, 
but  that  they  inwardly  unite  in  a  common  world,  and  that  the  infini- 
tude of  that  world  is  able  to  be  present  at  every  single  point.  It 
is  just  this  which  distinguishes  the  individualism  of  mere  nature 
from  the  spiritual  personality.  The  spirit-filled  personality,  thus 
rooted  in  an  inner  world,  by  no  means  rejects  all  bonds.  It  only 
rejects  the  bonds  that  are  laid  upon  it  from  without.  It  reinforces, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  bond  which  conjoins  it  with  an  invisible  order. 
Such  a  bond  is  best  to  be  reconciled  with  freedom,  for  the  latter  is 
not  possible  without  our  recognition  and  appropriation  of  the  superior 
powers  (Normen).  Luther  grounded  his  inmost  conviction  on  this 
direct,  unmediated  relation  with  God,  and  at  the  same  time  placed 
this  interior  faith  in  opposition  to  all  external  authority.  Was  he 
not  bound  in  every  deeper  issue  of  his  life  by  this  presence  of  the 
Divine  within  him,  more  strongly  bound  than  was  possible  by  any 
dogmas  and  institutions  imposed  from  without?  Has  not  Protest- 
antism, through  its  intensifying  of  personal  responsibility  imbued  life 
far  more  with  moral  earnestness?  So  Kant  sought  to  ground 
morality  purely  and  solely  in  man's  own  nature,  but  at  the  same 
time  man  grew  to  him  to  be  the  bearer  of  an  "intelligible"  world. 
No  one  can  say  of  him,  the  philosopher  of  the  idea  of  duty,  that  he 
in  any  sense  weakened  morality  by  this  direction  towards  "auton- 
omy." Only  he  who  denies  an  inner  world,  and  its  presence  in 
the  soul  of  man,  can  dispute  the  position  which  a  free  Christianity 
assigns  to  the  individual  as  a  spirit-filled  personality. 


3^2 

2.  We  cannot  summon  the  individual  to  a  greater  independence 
and  more  vigorous  development  without  demanding  also  for  religion 
and  life  a  more  perfect  transposition  of  their  content  into  one's  own 
characteristic  thinking,  without  requiring  more  spiritual  illumina- 
tion, more  individual  examination  and  decision.  The  personality 
aroused  to  self-activity  cannot,  must  not,  credulously  and  compli- 
antly accept  that  which  tradition  and  authority  present  to  it.  It 
must  insist  upon  a  justification  and  basis  for  that  which  is  to  rule 
over  it.  Hence  we  demand  for  religion,  in  the  second  place,  an 
intensifying  of  intellectual  activity.  In  making  this  demand,  we  know 
ourselves  to  be  at  one  with  the  characteristic  trait  of  modern  times 
which  conceives  of  life  more  from  the  standpoint  of  thought,  elevates 
conceptions,  ideas,  principles,  to  an  hitherto  unknown  importance, 
comprehends  life  more  in  its  totality,  and  bases  the  visible  world 
on  an  invisible  one. 

But  we  do  not  fail  to  recognize  the  dangers  of  such  an  increase  of 
intellectual  movement,  and  that  these  may  render  problematical 
all  gains  from  this  source.  There  can  be  no  effort  after  knowledge 
without  the  arousing  of  doubt  and  uncertainty,  without  the  danger 
that  knowledge  shall  detach  itself  from  the  rest  of  life,  set  itself  in 
opposition  to  it,  and  seek  to  produce  by  its  own  power  alone  what 
it  can  only  accomplish  in  union  with  the  others.  During  the  past  cen- 
tury we  have  often  seen  knowledge  claim  to  be  the  whole  of  life. 
Sometimes  it  would  deem  itself  able  to  take  no  account  of  facts  and 
circumstances,  and  to  create  a  reality  solely  by  its  speculative  power. 
At  other  times  it  believed  that  by  merely  reconstructing  and  vividly 
realizing  historic  facts  it  could  give  a  content  to  life.  Knowledge 
has  often,  in  religion  as  in  all  else,  evaporated  the  essence  of  life. 
In  place  of  quickening  truths  we  received  only  pictures  and  shadows. 
No  department  of  life  suffers  more  under  such  perversion  than  re- 
ligion, which  would  open  to  us  a  new  world  and  lift  us  above  all 
human  littleness. 

But,  again,  the  responsibility  for  this  error  lies  not  in  the  matter  it- 
self, but  in  man.  It  lies  not  in  knowledge  itself,  but  in  a  mistaken 
employment  of  knowledge.  It  is  precisely  when  knowledge  thinks 
greatly  of  its  mission  and  would  press  forward  beyond  all  sub- 
jective reflection  to  genuine  truth,  that  it  must  seek  wider  connec- 
tions, must  place  itself  at  the  service  of  an  inward  compulsion  and 


383 

need,  and  eventually  arrive  at  the  acceptance  of  basic  realities 
which  indeed  may  be  illuminated,  but  cannot  be  derived.  This  is 
especially  true  of  the  truths  with  which  religion  concerns  itself. 
For  in  it  all  the  manifoldness  of  phenomena  is  ultimately  traced 
back  to  the  fundamental  reality  that  a  higher  world  attains  to  a 
living  present  in  the  sphere  of  the  human.  The  demonstration  and 
development  of  this  fact  here  controls  all  intellectual  processes. 
If,  then,  in  opposition  to  the  old  teaching  we  free  Christians  make 
a  larger  demand  upon  the  thinking  powers,  it  can  only  be  because 
this  underlying  reality  is  to  be  brought  nearer  to  us  by  intellectual 
endeavor,  is  to  be  inwardly  illuminated  and  comprehended  in  its 
entirety.  By  no  means  would  we  dissolve  it  into  mere  concepts  and 
doctrines.  Thus  understood,  thinking  will  not  evaporate  the  con- 
tent of  religion.  It  will  deepen  it  and  clearly  disclose  its  spiritual 
nature.  In  so  doing  it  will  first  bring  it  to  full  efficiency  and  reveal 
its  fruitf ulness  for  the  whole  of  life. 

3.  With  the  emancipation  of  the  individual  and  the  more  vigorous 
development  of  the  thought-side  of  religion,  life,  for  us,  is  trans- 
formed more  into  our  own  personal  activity,  and  hence  must  seem 
to  us  more  significant  and  worthy.  From  this  point  of  view  a  dif- 
ferent attitude  towards  life,  a  different  valuation  of  human  existence 
and  capacities  will  be  developed  than  are  contained  in  the  traditional 
types  of  ecclesiastical  religion.  The  latter  is  strongly  inclined  to 
deny  man  all  individual  ability,  and  to  picture  him  in  as  dark  tints 
as  possible.  It  often  deems  itself  the  more  pious,  the  more  it  degrades 
man,  the  stronger  it  turns  to  the  light  all  that  is  low  and  base  in 
him.  At  the  same  time  the  total  impression  of  human  life  becomes 
more  and  more  gloomy  and  forbidding.  It  seems  preponderatingly 
to  be  the  sport  of  unreason.  The  world  is  eventually  conceived  as 
a  vale  of  sorrow  and  tears  from  which  alone  the  hope  and  expecta- 
tion of  a  world  beyond  can  rescue  us.  Such  a  frame  of  mind  may 
be  comprehensible  and  justifiable  for  particularly  troubled  and  dark 
epochs  in  history,  such,  for  instance,  as  the  downfall  and  dissolution 
of  antiquity;  but  to  bind  mankind  for  all  subsequent  times  to  it, 
this  we,  who  think  more  freely,  refuse  to  do  for  various  reasons 
which  conduce  to  the  peculiar  interest  of  religion.  We  reject  it 
because  some  faith  in  our  own  personal  ability  and  the  worth  of  our 
actions  is  indispensible  for  the  full  arousing  of    our  powers.    We 


3«4 

reject  it,  further,  because  we  would  not  make  of  religion  merely  a 
source  of  consolation  for  the  sick  and  weak,  but  require  of  it  also 
an  elevation  and  ennoblement  of  our  positive  and  creative  activity. 
We  reject  it  finally  because,  with  such  a  conception  of  its  nature 
religion  cannot  attain  to  formative  influence  in  the  greater  concerns 
and  entirety  of  life,  or  become  a  world-power.  Easily  enough 
a  relapse  of  mankind  into  this  depressed  and  gloomy  frame  may 
make  life  unreal  or  only  half  real.  In  contradiction  to  it  we  demand 
a  manly,  vigorous  and  joyous  Christianity.  Such  alone  will  prove 
equal  to  the  attacks  of  its  opponents,  who  at  the  present  day  assail 
it  with  peculiar  energy. 

But  this  demand  for  a  more  vigorous  and  joyous  attitude  in  life 
is  attended  with  many  dangers.  It  may  especially  lead  to  super- 
ficiality of  life  and  to  the  weakening  of  its  religious  character  if 
it  be  believed  that  this  change  of  front  towards  the  positive  in  religion 
is  possible  without  a  transformation  of  man  himself  and  without 
the  gain  of  a  new  world.  The  reaction  against  the  depressed  and 
sorrowful  mood  to  which  reference  has  been  made  has  often  begotten 
an  easy-going  optimism,  which  dwelt  especially  on  the  bright  side 
of  life  and  put  out  of  sight  as  much  as  possible  its  complications 
and  conflicts.  We  cannot  elucidate  here  how  many  general  consid- 
erations gainsay  such  an  optimism.  That  it  cannot  be  reconciled 
with  religion,  and  especially  not  with  the  Christian  religion,  does 
not  admit  of  a  doubt.  For,  if  the  world  as  it  presents  itself  to  us 
is  sufficient  and  satisfactory,  or  if  its  problems  receive  their  full  solu- 
tion through  the  natural  course  of  things,  what  need  is  there  of  re- 
ligion, what  need  of  a  new  world  and  a  reconstruction  of  life? 
Therefore,  a  free  Christianity  cannot  decisively  enough  spurn  any 
identification  with  this  superficial  optimism.  It  must  sharply  dif- 
ferentiate from  it  its  own  striving  for  a  more  vigorous  and  joyous 
shaping  of  life.  Nothing  has  done  more  harm  to  the  freer  attitude 
of  the  mind  in  religion  than  this,  that  it  seemed  to  take  the  problems 
and  conflicts  of  human  existence  less  seriously  than  did  the  old  school 
of  thought. 

In  truth,  this  striving  for  more  vigor  and  more  joy  may 
be  fully  maintained  with  any  approximation  to  a  naturalistic 
optimism.  Religion  ever  ultimates  in  the  affirmation  of  life,  espe- 
cially Christianity,  which  came  as  a   glad  tidings  from  the  king- 


3»5 

dom  of  God  to  mankind.  But  this  is  the  difference — and  it  is  a 
difference  of  the  greatest  importance — that  this  affirmation  is  not 
a  necessary  attribute  of  life  itself,  but  can  only  be  mediated  by  a 
thorough  overturn,  only  through  the  institution  of  a  new  life.  This 
new  element,  however,  is  not  a  work  of  mere  man,  but  the  manifesta- 
tion of  a  superior  order.  How,  indeed,  could  the  desire  for  such 
a  revolution  arise  if  the  existing  conditions  did  not  appear  to  be  not 
only  deficient  in  this  or  that  respect  but  also  inadequate  in  their 
totality  ?  Hence  the  Yea  of  which  religion  is  the  advocate  contains 
also  an  emphatic  Nay.  Yes,  it  first  attains  to  full  power  through 
the  contrast  afforded  by  the  Nay.  It  will,  therefore,  ever  keep  in 
mind  this  Nay,  and  in  this  way  will  remain  sharply  differentiated 
from  the  unconditional  affirmation  of  life  which  characterizes  opti- 
mism. But  precisely  because  this  new  Yea  does  not  rest  on  the 
capacity  of  man  alone  but  is  upborne  by  all  the  powers  of  a  new 
world,  it  can  inspire  man,  in  incomparably  higher  fashion  than  the 
optimism  referred  to,  with  courage  and  joyousness  of  heart. 

4.  Wherever,  in  this  way,  life  in  its  religious  aspects  preserves 
a  positive  character,  religion  will  also  be  able  to  enter  into  a  more 
friendly  relation  with  the  age  to  which  it  belongs.  It  will  not  look 
upon  a  conflict  with  its  age  as  normal  and  unavoidable,  as  the  older 
school  of  thought  has  accustomed  itself  to  believe  during  the  last 
few  centuries.  This  ancient  system  was  formulated  in  a  time  far 
distant  from  us  and  entirely  different  in  kind.  The  form  it  then 
assumed  can  only  be  perpetuated  by  a  flat  contradiction  of  the 
development  of  life  in  modern  times.  This  makes  it  prone  to  see 
in  the  latter  more  especially  the  problematical  and  mistaken,  and  to 
exercise  upon  its  doings  and  failures  to  do  a  cold  and  unfriendly 
criticism.  But  he  who  cannot  live  in  and  with  his  age,  who  is  not 
able  to  enter  into  its  inner  purpose  and  striving,  cannot  gain  any 
large  influence  upon  it.  He  must  not  be  surprised  if  he  is  treated 
by  his  time  as  though  he  were  a  stranger  and  is  thrust  into  the  back- 
ground as  much  as  possible.  But  how  can  such  an  isolation  content 
a  religion  which  aspires  to  influence  the  whole  of  human  life,  to 
elevate  man's  spiritual  nature  in  its  entirety  and  to  strive  for  a 
kingdom  of  God  on  earth? 

Again,  however,  great  dangers  confront  us  upon  the  way  we  recog- 
nize   as  necessary.    If  the  demand  is  made  that  religion  must 


386 

simply  accommodate  itself  to  its  time  and  fashion  itself  according  to 
the  demands  of  the  age,  then  religion  will  lose  all  independence 
and  be  unable  to  preserve  its  most  characteristic  qualities.  It  will 
follow  its  age  in  all  its  transformations  until  it  degenerates  at  last 
into  a  mere  matter  of  fashion.  This  consideration  is  strengthened 
by  the  peculiar  character  of  our  new  era.  Whatever  great  attain- 
ments the  present  age  has  arrived  at  by  intensifying  man's  con- 
sciousness of  power  and  directing  his  endeavors  to  the  compre- 
hension and  control  of  the  world,  it  cannot  be  said  to  possess  a 
distinctively  religious  character.  Its  attitude  towards  religion  is 
rather  that  of  a  stranger — yes,  even  an  enemy.  Hence  it  would 
imply  a  surrender  of  religion  to  this  hostile  power  if  it  were  simply 
to  follow  the  dictates  of  its  time. 

But  must  a  more  friendly  relation  between  religion  and  its  time 
be  necessarily  sought  at  the  expense  of  religion?  Is  there  not  a 
way  of  reconciliation  on  the  basis  of  the  independence  of  religion  ? 
The  dilemma  may  be  solved  if  in  religion  we  distinguish  between 
its  spiritual  substance  and  the  form  it  assumes  among  men,  and 
simultaneously  hold  apart  in  the  time  in  which  we  live  the  daily 
doing  of  men  and  its  higher  spiritual  content.  Essential  to  the 
nature  of  religion  is  the  possession  of  a  truth  which  is  above  all 
considerations  of  time.  Religion  has  a  fixed  and  enduring  character 
only  when  it  displays  a  life  peculiar  to  itself, — a  life  which  maintains 
itself  against  all  the  transformations  of  time  and  is  capable  of  influ- 
encing all  ages  with  superior  power.  But  greatly  as  this  superior 
life  with  its  fundamental  verities  overtops  all  human  ability,  its 
full  possession  and  development  man  can  only  gain  by  his  own 
endeavor  and  struggles.  That  he  is  able  to  do  this,  that  within 
the  bounds  of  time  he  is  able  to  appropriate  more  and  more  the 
eternal,  this  is  what  gives  to  the  movement  of  history  its  real  interest 
and  value.  This  full  appropriation,  however,  can  only  occur  in 
closest  union  with  the  entire,  world-historic  activity  of  mankind. 
This  activity  is  more  than  an  ebb  and  flow  of  human  opinions  and 
moods.  There  are  fulfilled  in  it  disclosures  of  spiritual  life.  The 
picture  of  the  world  grows  clearer,  man  becomes  master  of  his  envi- 
ronment, he  puts  more  reason  into  social  life  and  grows  in  soul 
power.  All  these  things  together  yield,  for  every  age,  a  state  of 
spiritual  activity  which  is  superior  to  the  arbitrary  will  of  man. 


3»7 

If  religion,  then,  would  operate  powerfully  and  effectively  upon 
mankind,  its  doctrines  and  forms  must  correspond  to  this  higher 
spiritual  state.  So  far  as  our  new  time  is  more  particularly  con- 
cerned, the  mighty  changes  it  has  wrought  in  the  intellectual  life 
of  man  are  apparent,  and  he  must  despair  of  any  manifestation  of 
reason  in  history  who  should  attempt  to  explain  all  these  changes 
as  the  bungling  work,  the  mere  delusion,  or  perchance  the  malignity 
of  man.  But,  if  religion,  thus  interpreted,  has  its  justification,  then 
it  can  only  be  of  service  to  religion  to  fully  recognize  this  and  to 
seek  a  closer  relation  with  its  age.  Whatever  religion  may  contain  of 
eternal  truth  will,  by  this  connection,  gain  greater  force  and  impres- 
siveness.  Incomparably  better,  in  such  a  case,  will  religion  be 
enabled  to  bring  the  age  to  its  own  deeper  life,  to  separate  in  it  the 
true  and  the  false,  the  abiding  and  the  transitory,  and  to  collect  and 
strengthen  whatever  of  truth  and  permanence  in  its  day  strives  up- 
ward. We  shall  thus  serve  religion  if,  while  upholding  its  inde- 
pendence, we  ally  it  more  closely  with  its  age. 

5.  All  the  considerations  hitherto  enumerated  co-operate  with 
each  other  to  change  the  position  of  religion  towards  life  in  its  en- 
tirety. The  older  school  of  thought  is  wont  to  set  off  religion  sharply 
from  every  other  form  of  attestation,  and  to  attribute  to  religion 
alone  an  independent  worth,  while  treating  all  else  as  merely  inci- 
dental,— yes,  as  indifferent.  But  this  awakens  serious  misgivings 
in  us  who  hold  more  modern  opinions.  For  one  thing,  the  other 
departments  of  life  will  resist  such  an  underrating  of  their  claims, 
and  in  retaliation  be  easily  induced  to  turn  a  harsh  front  towards 
religion.  On  the  other  hand  such  a  separation  inevitably  does 
harm  to  the  content  of  religion  itself,  and  inclines  it  to  deteriorate 
into  a  too  subjective  frame  of  mind.  Finally,  through  such  a 
separation  life  as  a  whole  does  not  attain  to  an  adequate  unity 
and  power.  All  these  things  together,  therefore,  dictate  a  closer 
alliance  of  religion  with  the  rest  of  life. 

But  this  alliance  has  its  peculiar  difficulties.  In  attempting  such 
a  connection  religion  encounters  no  small  dangers.  She  does  not 
seem  justified  in  simply  placing  herself  side  by  side  with  the  other 
interests  of  life.  She  must  be  more  than  these  if  she  is  not  to  sink 
below  them  and  suffer  ultimately  the  loss  of  her  self-dependence. 
For  these  other  interests  possess  in  human  action  their  characteristic, 


388 

clearly  defined  domain.  The  very  necessities  of  existence  compel 
us  to  admit — as  in  the  case  of  science,  politics,  etc. — their  right  and 
importance.  Religion,  on  the  other  hand,  has  no  assured  home  in 
this  visible  world  and  no  external  compulsion  forces  men  to  espouse 
her  cause.  Hence  it  may  easily  happen  to  her  as  it  did  to  Schiller's 
poet,  who  found  the  world  already  apportioned.  The  experience 
of  history  also  shows  that  wherever  religion  became  a  mere  factor 
of  the  general  culture  it  was  not  able  to  preserve  for  itself  an  inde- 
pendent position,  but  soon  deteriorated  to  a  feeble  and  vague  senti- 
ment. 

Extraordinary  conditions  must  be  postulated  if  religion  is  to  be 
more  closely  allied  to  the  whole  of  life  without,  in  so  doing,  losing 
its  unique  significance.  But  so,  in  truth,  it  is.  Our  human  life 
is  not  a  work  of  peaceful  construction,  according  to  an  assured  plan, 
on  a  foundation  already  laid,  but  is  full  of  problems, — yes,  conceived 
as  a  whole  it  is  the  most  difficult  of  all  problems.  Evolved  from 
nature  man  is  to  rise  to  a  new  and  higher  level,  to  the  world  of  the 
spirit.  But  not  only  is  his  own  ability  too  weak  for  such  a  task, 
his  very  inclination  cleaves  to  that  which  is  low, — yes,  there  is  danger 
of  an  entire  perversion  in  which  the  higher  shall  itself  be  drawn 
into  servitude  to  the  lower.  From  such  a  moral  complication  man 
can  only  be  freed,  and  culture  can  only  become  a  real  spiritual  cult- 
ure, if  man  is  lifted  above  his  own  ability  and  transplanted 
into  a  new  order  of  life  free  from  such  entanglements  and  restric- 
tions. It  is  religion  which  represents  this  complete  overturn  and 
makes  it  fully  effectual.  In  her  alone  this  conflict,  and  also  its 
victorious  issue,  come  to  their  complete  expression  and  develop- 
ment. In  this  religion  is  charged  with  a  unique  mission,  without 
whose  fulfilment  the  whole  of  life  is  arrested.  In  her  it  first  assumes 
the  form  of  a  movement  from  the  whole  to  the  whole.  In  her  the 
two  realms  are  first  clearly  distinguished.  Through  the  opening 
of  the  new  world  which  religion  makes  possible  to  us  the  whole  of 
life  is  established,  enlarged,  and  made  more  inward,  and  these  in- 
fluences are  extended  as  well  to  all  its  special  departments.  But,  if 
religion  thus  becomes  the  inmost  soul,  the  elevating  power  of  life, 
it  will  not  manifest  itself  as  something  exceptional,  but  even  in  the 
development  of  its  own  characteristic  quality  will  retain  its  relation 
to  the  whole.     Religion  makes  clearly  apparent  that  its  structure 


3»9 

is  not  so  simple  as  it  appears  to  those  who  would  make  all  the  depart- 
ments of  life  subsist  side  by  side  on  one  common  level. 

Let  us  now  look  back  for  a  moment.  Point  upon  point  we  saw 
the  demand  for  a  free  Christianity  create  new  problems.  Point 
upon  point  we  convinced  ourselves  that  the  handling  of  these  prob- 
lems is  full  of  danger,  and  that  to  fall  behind  the  demands  of  the 
situation  may  lead  to  a  weakening  of  religion — yes,  to  an  approach 
to  mere  naturalism.  At  the  same  time,  however,  we  also  saw  that 
a  free  Christianity  is  by  no  means  delivered  over  defencelessly  to 
such  aberrations,  but  can,  of  its  own  strength,  fully  overcome  them. 
It  only  needs  to  press  forward  everywhere  beyond  the  Nay  to  the 
Yea,  to  hold  fast  to  the  latter  and  bring  it  to  full  acceptance.  Every 
movement  towards  freedom  is,  under  existing  human  conditions, 
exposed  to  the  danger  that  many  shall  believe  themselves  one  with 
it  who  do  not  understand  freedom  in  the  positive  sense  as  an  uplift- 
ing of  the  life  to  spontaneity,  self-dependence,  and  self-responsi- 
bility, but  look  upon  it  negatively  as  a  mere  removal  of  constraint. 
This  negative  view  will  never  be  able  to  maintain  itself  against  the 
opposition, — yes,  will  ever  be  inwardly  dependent  on  and  subject 
to  the  latter.  But  we  saw  how,  in  the  domain  of  religion,  freedom 
is  also  capable  of  a  direction  to  the  positive;  how,  point  by  point, 
it  makes  our  tasks  not  less  but  greater,  and  summons  our  whole 
being  to  an  elevation  of  spirit.  Let  us,  therefore,  leave  behind  us 
all  that  is  merely  negative;  let  us  definitely  break  with  all  which, 
springing  from  the  tendencies  of  our  time  would  depreciate  the  con- 
tent and  power  of  religion.  Thus  we  shall  make  it  evident  that 
our  desire  for  freedom  in  no  way  contradicts  the  depth  and  potency 
of  religion  but  that  this  depth  and  power  can  only  attain  through 
freedom  its  full  disclosure.  For  then,  despite  all  hindrances,  we 
shall  win  the  victory! 


39° 


REMONSTRANTISM  AND   THE   REMONSTRANT 
BROTHERHOOD. 

BY  PROFESSOR  H.   Y.   GROENEWEGEN,   D.D.,   OF  LEIDEN. 
(Read  at  the  Plymouth  Session  of  the  Congress.) 

It  is  the  first  time,  I  think,  that  the  Remonstrant  Society  or 
Brotherhood  has  been  publicly  discussed  on  American  soil.  I  am 
grateful  to  the  Committee  of  the  Congress  for  inviting  me  to  do  this. 

Many  of  you  will  scarcely  have  heard  the  name  before,  and  will 
have  been  a  little  astonished  that  the  attention  of  this  international 
meeting  is  to  be  drawn  to  a  not  very  extended  religious  organization 
in  Holland  of  exclusively  local  importance.  And  the  theologians 
among  you,  who,  of  course,  know  the  name  of  the  famous  Leiden 
professor,  James  Arminius,  and  have  heard  about  his  resolute  pro- 
test against  Calvinistic  dogmatism,  will  perhaps  have  asked  if  the 
old  dogmatic  question  of  predestination  is  not  rather  obsolete,  and  if 
that  violent  struggle  between  Remonstrants  and  Contra -remonstrants 
which  once  convulsed  Church  and  State  in  Holland  has  not  become 
to-day  of  only  historical  interest. 

I  should  not  be  bold  enough  to  call  your  attention  to  the  body  that 
delegated  me  to  this  Congress  and  to  the  religious  movement  it  has 
represented  during  nearly  three  centuries  if  they  had  not  a  special 
and  extremely  interesting  place  in  the  history  of  religious  life  in  Hol- 
land, and  if  they  were  not  a  very  characteristic  embodiment  of  the 
original  spirit  of  religious  freedom  and  dogmatic  tolerance  in  Prot- 
estant Christianity.  Let  me  give  you  first  some  historical  outlines, 
then,  tell  you  something  about  the  character  of  our  work  and  aims. 

The  Remonstrants  got  their  name  from  the  Remonstrance,  a  docu- 
ment which  contains  all  in  one  a  petition,  a  protest,  an  apology,  and 
a  creed.  Forty- three  ministers  offered  it  in  1610  to  the  government 
of  Holland.  Chiefly  they  oppose  the  principle  of  confessionalism. 
For  they  acknowledge  but  one  foundation  and  standard  of  true 
Christian  faith  and  life.    This  was  the  word  of  God,   which  they, 


39i 

like  every  one  in  their  century,  supposed  to  be  found  only  in  the 
Bible  as  a  whole.  No  human  teaching  or  decree  may  be  equalled 
with  it.  Therefore,  they  refuse  to  submit  to  the  foreign  theology 
which  Calvinists  were  tyrannically  forcing  on  the  Church.  They 
agree  with  Arminius,  who  could  not  find  the  rude  dogma  of  predes- 
tination in  the  Bible.  They  also  are  convinced  that  the  Calvinist 
system  gives  what  they  call  an  "embellished  fatum"  instead  of 
Jesus'  heavenly  Father.  And  they  hold  that  to  be  impious  and 
destructive  both  of  religion  and  morality.  In  their  famous  five 
articles  they  lay  down  their  conceptions  of  the  holiness  of  God,  the 
redemption  of  Christ,  and  the  responsibility  of  men.  But  they  do 
not  claim  supremacy  for  their  opinions,  as  the  Calvinists  do. 
They  only  vindicate  freedom  and  toleration  in  religious  thought  and 
life  on  the  basis  of  the  word  of  God.  Ecclesiastical  unity  built 
on  their  principles  was  their  ideal.  And  they  hope  the  government 
will  assure  concord  and  peace  by  convoking  a  free  national  synod 
to  fix  a  purely  religious  one. 

So  the  Remonstrants  were  vividly  conscious  of  representing  not 
simply  a  dogmatic  opinion  or  a  theological  system,  but  a  special  type 
of  true  Christian  consciousness  and  church  organization.  And  they 
were  deeply  convinced  that  it  was  nothing  new  they  claimed.  For 
it  was  as  well  a  representation  of  the  essential  character  of  the  mighty 
reformation  movement  in  Holland,  which  the  whole  people  was  still 
struggling  for  in  its  bloody  and  terrible  war,  as  the  direct  applica- 
tion of  pure  Christian  ideas  to  ecclesiastical  and  political  life. 

Undoubtedly  they  were  right.  Many  decades  before  Luther 
uttered  his  powerful  words,  at  least  before  any  influence  from  either 
the  Saxon  or  the  Swiss  reformation  could  be  observed  in  Holland, 
the  mighty  movement  of  religious  revival  and  purification  had  sprung 
out  of  two  sources.  The  first  was  a  purely  religious  one.  The 
second  was  the  influence  of  some  religious  humanists. 

Numerous  preachers  and  popular  authors  had  brought  to  the 
people  neither  Roman  Catholic  formalism  and  miracle  worship  nor 
a  new  scholastic  dogmatism,  but  simply  the  Biblical  and  practical 
piety  of  the  gospel  itself,  as  it  was  understood  at  that  time.  To 
these  first  reformers  or  forerunners  of  the  Reformation  the  dogma  of 
predestination  was  unknown,  as  was  the  ideal  of  a  church  built  on 
a  narrow,  limited  confession.     Very  near  to  them  stood  among  the 


392 

Dutch  humanists  many  scholars  and  teachers  who  brought  to  the 
very  extended  class  of  well-educated  and  substantial  citizens  sound 
principles  of  moral  religious  thought  and  life,  with  bright  and  large 
ideals  of  freedom  in  confession  and  inquiry,  of  tolerance  to  different 
theological  opinions,  and  of  a  church  in  which  every  form  of  true 
Christianity  might  dwell  in  liberty,  concord,  and  peace.  The  books 
of  Erasmus,  read  and  admired  everywhere,  gave  an  important  im- 
petus to  humanism  of  that  kind.  They  not  only  spread  a  spirit  of 
sarcastic  criticism,  as  often  is  said,  but  also  of  edifying  Biblical  re- 
ligious liberalism.  The  grand  soul  of  William  the  Silent  was  filled 
with  these  aims,  and  the  well-known  genius  of  Hugo  Grotius,  the 
warm  friend  of  the  Remonstrant  party,  not  less  so. 

But  how  could  such  ideas  be  realized  in  that  century  and  among 
that  people?  Peaceable  piety  could  only  be  discerned  like  a  lovely 
melody  amidst  the  brutal  noises  of  war.  Liberal  statesmen  could 
only  prudently  try  to  guide  the  people  on  the  difficult  way  to  that 
still  unreached  goal.  And  just  at  the  time  that  the  national  religious 
life  was  beginning  to  be  organized  under  the  care  of  the  government 
several  eminent  preachers  of  quite  different  principles  came  to  the 
Netherlands.  Disciples  of  Calvin  and  Beza  came  from  Geneva,  and 
brought  with  them,  as  a  new  element  of  religious  life,  not  only  their 
dogmas,  presumed  to  be  founded  on  the  word  of  God,  but  also  the 
exclusive  spirit  of  their  theological  and  ecclesiastical  system,  and, 
still  more,  that  confessionalistic  fanaticism  which  always  grows  up 
in  days  of  religious  struggle.  The  preaching  of  their  strong  and 
determined  beliefs  deeply  affected  the  sturdy  people  of  Holland, 
threatened  with  martyrdom  everyday.  For  the  building  of  a  national 
church  a  firmly  formulated  belief  seemed  to  be  of  much  more  value 
than  free  evangelical  piety.  Did  not  Geneva  give  an  illustrious  ex- 
ample of  political  and  ecclesiastical  organization?  So  an  ever-in- 
creasing number  welcomed  this  zealous  Calvinism  as  a  light  from 
heaven  in  the  darkness  and  distress. 

But  the  more  passionately  the  Calvinists  began  their  activity, 
the  more  stress  the  old  national  reformation  party  laid  upon  its 
claims  of  doctrinal  freedom  and  concord.  The  exaggerated  dogma 
of  predestination  roused  warm  and  earnest  protests,  not  only  among 
the  professional  theologians,  like  Arminius  (Witenbogaert) ,  Epis- 
copius,  and  many  others,  but  also  among  a  wide  circle  of  truly  re- 


393 

ligious  people  of  both  high  and  low  station.  They  refused  to  accept 
what  they  called  a  foreign  theology.  They  would  not  suffer  Chris- 
tian thought  and  life  to  be  compressed  into  a  quasi-Biblical  doctrine 
of  merely  one-sided  piety.  Why  should  the  idea  of  God's  omnip- 
otence and  sovereignty  be  pressed  to  an  extreme,  and  his  holiness 
and  love  be  disregarded.  Did  Jesus  teach  God  as  a  divine  tyrant, 
a  Moloch  who  destined  men  to  be  sinners  and  damned  them  for  eter- 
nity? Does  the  consciousness  of  human  dependence  and  weakness 
force  us  to  overlook  that  of  moral  freedom  and  responsibility  ?  Bet- 
ter than  all  arrogant  doctrines  about  the  mystery  of  God's  govern- 
ment of  the  world  was  the  maintaining  of  sound  piety.  Therefore, 
no  theoretic  controversies,  or  questions  to  which  God  himself  only 
could  give  decisive  solution,  should  be  allowed  to  break  fraternal 
feeling  and  practical  co-operation  among  the  followers  of  Christ. 
So  it  was  not  the  tolerance  of  philosophical  or  political  indifferentism, 
placing  itself  above  religious  thought  as  a  whole,  but  that  of  an  ele- 
vated religion  looking  for  the  real  word  of  God  to  mankind  in  all 
the  different  words  of  mankind  about  God.  "In  necessariis  unitas, 
in  dubiis  libertas,  in  omnibus  caritas."  Principles  and  considerations 
like  these  were  in  the  seventeenth  century  in  as  complete  accordance 
with  the  national  spirit  as  they  are  in  ours. 

But  the  spirit  of  Calvinism  found  many  points  of  contact  in  the 
people's  character.  The  higher  classes,  mostly  educated  in  the 
schools  of  humanist  teachers,  were  for  the  greater  part  sympathetic 
with  liberal  religious  aims.  The  lower  came  every  day  more  under 
the  influence  of  popular  preachers,  who  often  were  fanatic  in  speech 
and  given  to  dispute  in  the  streets  and  inns.  The  magistrates  at 
first  were  mostly  liberally-minded,  not  only  by  personal  conviction 
and  the  powerful  influence  of  statesmen  like  Oldenbarneveldt  and 
Grotius,  and  burgomasters  like  Hooft,  but  also  from  considerations 
of  practical  policy.  People  needed  nothing  more  than  concord  and 
unity,  politically  as  well  as  ecclesiastically.  Catholicism  had  still 
power  enough  in  the  Netherlands  to  conquer  the  young  Protestant- 
ism, when  divided.  The  Spanish  army  was  on  the  watch  to  destroy 
that  nation  of  heretics  if  it  were  split  into  parties.  Therefore,  the 
liberal  policy,  represented  by  the  most  powerful  statesman  Holland 
ever  had,  John  Oldenbarneveldt,  and  the  Secretary  of  Rotterdam, 
Hugo  Grotius, — that  man  of  many  interests, — was  forced  to  give 


394 

again  and  again  its  mighty  support  to  the  Remonstrants  and  their 
allies,  and  tried  to  compel  churchmen  and  people  to  maintain  free- 
dom, tolerance,  and  unity.  Even  this  was  fatal.  For  it  made  of  a 
purely  religious  movement  a  bitter  political  quarrel.  The  pious 
thoughts  of  Arminius,  the  peaceable  aims  of  his  friends,  became  a 
battle-cry.  The  noble  protest  and  petition  of  the  Remonstrance 
was  a  like  a  spark  in  the  powder.  Explosions  here  and  there,  and 
the  fire  broke  out  everywhere.  The  people  of  Holland  is  not  easily 
driven  into  fanaticism,  but,  if  it  is,  its  fanaticism  is  passionate  and 
inflexible.  The  man  of  the  street  was  systematically  excited  against 
the  heretical  preachers  who  seemed  to  endanger  the  bliss  of  heaven 
and  against  the  magistrates  who  would  not  suffer  ministers  to  be  in- 
sulted. Orthodox  intolerance  refused  to  take  the  sacraments  from 
the  hand  of  a  minister  who  did  not  confess  that  God  created  sinners 
for  eternal  damnation.  An  exclusive  Calvinism  demanded  the 
separation  and  sundering  of  church  parties.  Preachers,  even 
moderate  Calvinists,  who  declared  that  the  controversy  did  not  affect 
heavenly  bliss,  and  politicians  who  claimed  unity  in  Church  and  State, 
were  suspected  and  hated.  As  the  years  went  on,  the  uncertainty 
increased,  the  tension  grew  severer  every  day,  and  the  struggle  be- 
came more  and  more  a  merely  political  one.  Even  foreign  politics, 
for  instance  that  of  James  I.,  made  its  influence  felt.  In  an  evil 
hour  Prince  Maurice  of  Orange  took  sides  with  the  Calvinist  party, 
not  because  he  was  convinced  of  the  truth  of  their  opinions,  for  he 
declared  himself  to  be  a  warrior  and  to  know  nothing  about  the 
doctrinal  quarrel,  but  because  Oldenbarneveldt  was  his  political 
rival,  and  the  liberal  party  seemed  to  be  inimical  to  his  power  as 
the  chief  commander  of  the  army;  perhaps  also  because  he  felt 
sympathy  for  the  masses  who  seemed  to  be  suppressed  by  the  mag- 
istracy. With  a  bold  coup  oVitat  he  annihilated  his  adversary. 
Oldenbarneveldt,  Grotius,  and  several  other  leaders  were  imprisoned. 
Maurice  did  not  even  prevent  a  shamefully  packed  jury  from  sen- 
tencing the  old  statesman  to  death.  And  once  more  a  dark  tragedy 
sprang  from  a  mistake. 

In  these  circumstances  the  party  of  confessionalism  and  discord 
called  and  controlled  the  synod  of  Dordrecht  in  1619,  at  which 
Remonstrantism  was  condemned  and  the  Remonstrants  were  cast 
out  of  the  Church.     And  the  last  act  of  the  tragedy  was  a  long  list 


395 

of  persecutions,  banishments,  etc.  In  that  time  the  Remonstrant 
Brotherhood  was  founded  among  the  more  courageous  and  tenacious 
ministers,  and  soon  extended  to  a  free  union  of  congregations.  Dur- 
ing many  years  divine  service  could  be  held  only  secretly  in  old  brew- 
eries and  warehouses.  Gradually,  they  were  tolerated  by  connivance. 
Modest  churches  were  built  here  and  there  behind  houses,  so  that 
orthodox  people  would  not  take  offence.  Most  of  the  old  churches 
are  hidden  to  this  day.  Removed  from  official  employments,  Re- 
monstrants had  but  little  influence  on  public  life.  Self-interest 
drove  people  to  the  Established  Church.  Calvinism  for  about  two 
centuries  gave  its  imprint  to  our  social,  political,  and  ecclesiastical 
organization. 

Only  one  thing  Calvinism  could  not  do.  It  could  not  prevent  the 
old  national  spirit  of  simple  Biblical  and  practical  piety,  connected 
with  anti-confessionalism  and  anti-clericalism,  from  vigorously  work- 
ing on,  not  only  in  the  Remonstrant  and  Baptist  congregations,  but 
also,  notwithstanding  the  supremacy  of  orthodoxy,  in  the  Univer- 
sities, in  the  Church  itself,  and  in  many  hearts. 

Henceforward  it  was  the  task  of  the  Remonstrant  Brotherhood 
to  teach  and  to  preach  the  gospel,  in  fidelity  to  its  old  principles 
of  freedom  and  tolerance.  And  that  is  still  its  task  to-day.  It  has 
neither  confession  nor  prescribed  ceremonies.  Its  articles  of  govern- 
ment relate  only  to  the  administration  of  the  congregations  and  the 
rights  and  duties  of  the  ministers.  Any  one  can  become  a  member 
if  he  declares  himself  in  sympathy  with  the  character  of  the  organiza- 
tion and  with  the  purpose  of  its  work,  as  defined  in  the  first  article 
of  the  common  discipline:  "The  Remonstrant  Brotherhood  has 
as  its  aim  the  promotion  of  the  religious  life  founded  on  the  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ,  in  fidelity  to  its  principles  of  freedom  and  tolerance." 

I  venture  to  say  that  the  body  I  am  representing  has  fulfilled  that 
task  not  without  honor,  though  it  is  as  a  church  smaller  than  it  ought 
to  be.  It  has  given  to  our  people  during  nearly  three  centuries  sev- 
eral of  the  best  and  most  famous  preachers,  whose  names,  of  course, 
never  reach  you,  but  are  not  forgotten  by  us.  They  made  their 
super-confessional  Christianity  as  attractive  as  possible.  At  many 
times  and  in  many  cities  our  small  churches  have  been  overfilled. 
Numerous  members  of  the  orthodox  National  Church  have  preferred 
our  free  and  peaceful  piety  to  the  exclusiveness  and  strife  of  the  ruder 


396 

Calvinists  and  their  conservative  followers,  who  gave,  as  our  people 
say,  neither  fish  nor  meat.  The  influence  of  our  literature  of  instruc- 
tion and  devotion,  extending  far  beyond  our  small  body,  was  our 
best  revenge  for  being  cast  out  of  the  Church.  In  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century  the  traditional  orthodoxy  became  so  nebulous 
that  Remonstrants  began  to  ask  whether  they  needed  still  to  be  sepa- 
rated. Had  it  not  been  their  old  ideal  to  have  brotherly  unity  among 
Christians  of  different  opinions?  A  project  was  even  made  in 
1798  to  unite  all  the  Protestant  churches  in  a  large  community. 
But  the  time  for  it  had  not  yet  come,  and  is  to-day  farther  out  of  sight 
than  a  century  ago.  Too  often  it  is  forgotten  that  in  the  evolution 
of  religion  the  characteristic  features  of  historical  bodies  are  more 
powerful  than  abstract  and  often  vague  ideals.  And,  since  religious 
dogmatism  has  arisen  again,  the  struggle  for  religious  evolution  has 
also  been  renewed,  and  we  have,  on  our  parts,  to  do  what  we  can  for 
the  victory  of  a  piety  both  free  and  tolerant. 

An  important  proof  that  Remonstrantism  has  not  existed  in  vain 
has  been  given  in  its  contribution  of  a  succession  of  well-known 
scholars  to  science  and  religious  thought.  After  the  days  of  Ar- 
minius  and  Grotius  many  of  these  were  appointed  as  professors  at 
the  Remonstrant  seminary.  Episcopius  founded  the  latter  in  1633, 
and  joined  it  to  the  Amsterdam  Athenaeum.  Now  it  is  in  Leiden, 
annexed  to  the  university.  Episcopius,  formerly  a  professor  at 
Leiden,  was  the  eloquent  defender  of  Remonstrantism  at  Dor- 
drecht. Removed  and  banished,  he  wrote  a  Remonstrant  confession, 
the  prologue  of  which  is  its  most  interesting  part,  as  it  is  a  clear 
demonstration  of  the  but  temporary  and  relative  validity  of  all  creeds, 
and  a  resolute  exposition  of  purely  anti-confessional  principles. 
His  successor,  Curcellseus,  issued  one  of  the  first  critical  editions  of 
the  New  Testament.  Philippus  a  Limborgh  wrote  a  famous  dog- 
matical work  to  promote  practical  piety  and  peace,  and  was  well 
known  in  the  whole  theological  world  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
The  versatile  John  Clericus  was  perhaps  the  first  scholar  who  based 
exegesis  on  historical  criticism,  the  editor  of  Erasmus's  works,  the 
fellow-worker  of  Locke  in  philosophy,  and  pre-eminent  in  many  other 
sciences.  His  successor,  Wettstein,  founded  the  study  of  Bible 
texts  upon  the  comparison  of  many  manuscripts.  Wyttenbach  is 
still  well  known  to  all  who  study  the  classics.     Van  Hemert  was  the 


397 

first  Kantian  philosopher  in  Holland,  and  began  the  work  of  the 
renewal  of  the  religious  faith  in  our  country.  My  predecessor, 
Tiele,  of  Leiden,  founded  the  study  of  the  history  of  religions,  and 
was  one  of  the  leaders  of  religious  liberalism  among  us. 

So  the  Remonstrant  society  stood  open  to  the  influence  of  a  free 
science  in  Christian  life.  Almost  without  struggle  the  new  ideas 
about  Bible  and  gospel,  religion  and  Christianity,  church  and 
divine  worship,  entered  our  old  congregations.  Some  of  them  were 
a  little  more  conservative,  others  more  radical,  according  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  ministers.  But  there  was  no  principle  of  opposition 
against  an  orderly  evolution.  No  wonder  that  in  the  last  fifty  years 
many  members  and  ministers  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church,  tired 
and  offended  by  the  troublesome,  often  hopeless  struggle  against 
an  intolerant  orthodox  majority,  preferred  our  organization  to  one 
in  which  the  new  spirit  was  always  more  suspected,  or  even  hated, 
than  welcomed.  For  the  liberal  religious  movement  in  Holland,  as 
a  whole,  it  is  true,  it  is  deplorable  that  the  so-called  modern  party 
has  decayed  in  the  National  Reformed  Church.  But  our  congre- 
gations in  many  places  could  be  its  shelter.  The  number  of  their 
members  is  from  two  to  five  times  greater  than  it  was  half  a  century 
ago,  and  many  new  congregations  have  arisen.  The  last  of  them 
I  was  happy  to  help  found  in  the  old  city  of  Dordrecht,  where  once 
Remonstrantism  seemed  to  be  defeated  forever.  And,  were  we  able 
to  offer  more  financial  support,  I  am  sure,  in  numerous  places,  we 
could  found  new  congregations  and  do  still  more  for  the  consolidation 
of  liberal  religious  life. 

But,  though  smaller  and  weaker  than  we  ought  to  be,  in  com- 
parison with  the  task  history  has  laid  upon  us,  we  are  ready  and 
willing  to  do  all  we  can.  The  past  has  proved  that  religious  unity 
in  freedom  is  possible.  The  present  shows  Christianity  needing 
the  principles  we  maintained  as  much  as  ever  before.  The  future, 
I  hope,  will  increase  in  sound  historical  consciousness  our  active  love 
for  pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty. 


39« 

Rev.  F.  C.  Fleischer's  paper,  read  before  the  Ministerial  Union  on 
Monday,  September  30,  finds  its  proper  place  here: — 


MENNONITISM  IN  ITS  INTERNATIONAL 
RELATIONS. 

BY  REV.   F.   C.   FLEISCHER,  B.D.,  MAKKUM,  HOLLAND. 

The  great  German  teacher  of  philosophical  pessimism,  Arthur 
Schopenhauer,  has  written  an  epigram  in  which  he  tells  the  story 
of  an  ingot  of  yellow  which  was  rubbed  on  a  black  stone  without 
leaving  a  yellow  streak.  People  then  exclaimed,  "This  is  no  pure 
gold!"  and  the  ingot  was  cast  aside  among  the  baser  metals.  But 
afterwards  it  happened  that  they  found  the  stone,  though  a  black 
one,  not  to  have  been  a  touchstone.  The  ingot  was  sought  for 
again,  and  acknowledged  as  an  object  of  true  value.  The  philoso- 
pher's conclusion  is  "that  true  gold  cannot  be  assayed  save  by  a  true 
touchstone. " 

This  pleasing  parable  may  be  applied  to  the  people  called  Ana- 
baptists, Mennonites,  Moravians,  etc.,  whose  common  fundamental 
tenets  have  been  most  purely  expressed  by  the  Mennonites.  "In 
history  they  are  judged  almost  wholly  by  their  murderers,"  as 
W.  E.  Griffis  has  rightly  observed.*  "Their  glorious  purpose  has 
been  hidden  under  an  epithet  which  is  a  myth  of  fancy."  This 
epithet  was  the  opprobious  term  "fanatic  Anabaptists," — a  vile 
slander,  shrouding  in  a  fog  the  pure  ideals  of  a  people  loving  peace 
and  truth. 

But  history  has  changed  front.  The  assiduous  labors  of  C.  A. 
Cornelius,!  L.  Keller,f  J.  G.  De  Hoop  Scheffer,f  and  others,  have 
restored  them  to  integrity.  The  affair  of  Munster,  as  has  been 
proven  clearly,  was  but  an  episode,  was  but  the  licentious  outbreak 

•See  the  New  World,  Vol.  IV.,  Number  XVI.  (December,  1895),  p.  647  ("The  Anabap- 
tirts,"  by  W.  E.  Griffis). 

tDe  fontibus  historias  Seditionis  Monasteriensis  Anabaptistioe  (1850);  Geschichte  des 
munsterischen  Aufruhrs  (1855-1860);  Die  mederlandischen  Wiedertaufer  w&hrend  der  Be- 
lagenmg  MUnsters,  1 534-1 535  (1869). 


399 

of  a  fraction  of  them  lapsed  from  their  own  principles,  imitating 
moreover,  it  may  be  added,  their  persecutors, — doing  unto  others 
as  others  had  done  to  them.  But,  for  the  rest,  they  were  a  simple- 
minded  people,  closely  agreeing  with  Jesus'  teaching  and  dreaming 
within  their  pious  souls  of  the  realization  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
on  earth.  Moreover,  this  ideal  invested  them  with  the  influence 
of  a  broad  international  religious  movement,  which  in  the  course 
of  time  has  yielded  riches  valued  by  free  Christians  in  all  denomi- 
nations. 

There  is  no  general  appellation  for  the  different  adherents  of  this 
religious  movement,  if  we  wish  to  avoid  the  mistake  and  the  injustice 
of  their  persecutors,  who  considered  them  to  be  all  of  the  same  alloy 
and  called  them  all  together  "Anabaptists."  It  is  for  this  reason 
I  have  purposed  to  call  them  by  the  name  "Baptizers."  *  I  believe 
this  to  be  historically  the  best  name  by  which  may  be  combined 
all  these  different  though  affiliated  sects.  Nevertheless,  I  have  not 
used  this  term  in  my  title  because  it  is  under  the  name  of  Mennon- 
ites  that  they  have  survived  the  days  of  their  varying  and  struggling 
convictions  and  of  persecution  by  their  oppressors. 


II. 

The  history  of  the  Mennonites  is  a  history  of  tears  and  sorrows. 
Without  any  restriction  it  may  be  stated  that  they  were  an  ecclesia 
pressa.  Prison  fever,  tortures,  decapitation,  burning  at  the  stake, 
burials  alive,  and  drowning  decimated  their  ranks.  After  all  criti- 
cal subtraction,  their  martyr  roll  is  probably  much  larger  than  that 
of  any  other  Protestant  sect.  Even  the  mercy  of  their  tyrants  was 
merciless  as  a  two-edged  sword.  Who  should  revoke  his  errors, 
said  a  decree  of  William,  Duke  of  Bavaria,  would  be  beheaded, 
who  refused  to  revoke  would  be  burned  at  the  stake.  As  doves 
before  the  hawk,  they  flew  from  country  to  country.  The  foxes  had 
their  holes,  the  birds  of  the  air  their  nests,  but  they,  like  their  Master, 
had  not  where  to  lay  their  heads. 

Persecuted  people  do  not  write  their  doings.    Every  record  might 

*  See  my  article  (paper)  at  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious 
Thinkers  and  Workers,  held  in  London,  May,  1801  ("Liberal  Religious  Thought  at  the  Beginning 
of  the  20th  Century,"  London,  1901,  p.  209,  "The  Dutch  Mennonite  Community")- 


400 

prove  dangerous,  treacherous.  This  is,  perhaps,  the  reason  why 
their  earlier  history  has  remained  obscure  and  uncertain.  Some 
writers  trace  for  them  an  apostolic  succession,  as  does  L.  Keller, 
who  comprehends  Mennonitism  (Anabaptism)  as  one  of  the  phe- 
nomenal forms  of  a  spiritual  currency  as  old  as  Christendom,  and 
of  no  less  genuine  significance  than  the  ecclesiastical,  dogmatical, 
clerical  currency,  though  the  latter  is  far  more  obvious.*  Other 
scholars,  more  or  less  hesitatingly,  make  them  successors  to  the 
Waldenses.  In  my  opinion  the  temptation  to  establish  a  spiritual 
affiliation  between  the  Mennonites  and  the  earlier  Christian  sects 
is  one  that  the  sober  historian  must  resist.  The  only  incontestable 
result  is  that  in  Holland  a  few  indications  have  been  found  of 
sacramentarian  heresy  which  occurred  long  before  the  starting 
of  the  Baptizers'  movement  in  Switzerland.  Probably  the  late  Rev. 
A.  M.  Cramer  was  right  in  declining  to  enter  into  the  controversy, 
remarking  that  the  origin  of  a  spiritual  movement  is  parallel  to  that 
of  Lake  Leman,  which  is  formed  by  a  number  of  larger  and  smaller 
rivers  and  brooks. 

Their  first  obvious  appearance  in  history  was  marked  by  a  bloody 
scene.  It  was  when  Felix  Manz  was  drowned,  a  young  and  learned 
man  of  a  distinguished  family  at  Zurich,  but  who  had  committed 
the  crime  of  controverting  in  public  Zwingli's  theses  on  Christian 
Baptism  and  of  disapproving  of  cruel  and  abominable  war  (Jan. 
5,  1527).  Then  things  went  worse  and  worse.  Their  list  of  mar- 
tyrs was  not  long  in  waiting,  and  within  a  tew  years  they  had  an 
endless  oral  tradition  and  a  whole  library  of  letters,  songs,  and 
other  relics  of  the  champions  of  their  faith.  No  later  than  1581, 
in  South  Germany  and  Austria,  2,159  Baptizers  had  already  been 
strangled.  Within  the  brief  space  of  four  years  no  less  than  1,000 
Baptists  had  been  murdered  in  the  Tyrol.  In  the  Netherlands 
and  Belgium,  then  part  of  the  hereditary  lands  of  Charles  V., 
the  fires  of  persecution  burned  with  an  intensity  displayed  nowhere 
else.  In  Italy  alone  the  extirpation  of  the  Baptizers  was,  perhaps, 
still  more  decisive  and  consistent,  and  ended  with  the  total  exter- 
mination of  the  movement.  This  is  the  more  to  be  lamented,  as 
the  Italian  congregations  distinguished  themselves  by  a  meek  spirit 
and  a  steady  progress,  guarding  against  mere  political  visions,  and,. 

*  See  the  article  of  Professor  Cramer,  D.D.,  in  Doopsgesinde  Bydrogen,  xliii.  (1903)  p.  155. 


401 

moreover,  sober  and  radical  enough  to  break  away  from  Roman  Cath- 
olic sacerdotalism  and  other  errors.  They  stood  even  nearer  to  us 
in  their  dogmatic  views  than  the  Mennonites  of  the  School  of  Menno 
Simons  himself.  Baptism,  for  instance,  was,  in  their  view,  a  sym- 
bol, not  a  sacrament;  the  reprobation  of  infant  baptism  hardly  more 
than  an  accessory  matter;  nor  communion  anything  else  than  a 
mere  solemnization.  In  1550  they  had  a  council  at  Venice,  at- 
ttended  by  sixty  delegates  of  thirty  or  more  Italian  and  Swiss  con- 
gregations.* The  confession  of  faith  upon  which  they  agreed  was, 
of  course,  very  liberal:  it  acknowledged  the  humanity  of  Christ, 
born  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  though  invested  with  divine  powers; 
it  denied  even  the  beliefs  in  angels,  in  the  devil,  and  in  hell.  Agos- 
tino  only,  the  delegate  of  the  congregation  at  Cittadella,  could 
not  agree  with  such  an  unprecedented  liberalism,  and  withdrew. 
Besides  these  liberal  congregations  there  were  also  a  few  of  more 
orthodox  confession,  which  afterwards  united  with  the  Moravian 
Huterites.  The  apostasy  and  treachery  of  Manelfi  in  1551  caused 
the  total  extermination  of  these  liberal  congregations,  while  the 
apprehension  of  Giulio  Gherlandi  in  1559,  who  had  about  him  a 
small  band  of  Baptizers  dwelling  in  fifty-one  Italian  towns  in  his 
neighborhood,  had  the  same  effect  for  the  more  orthodox  con- 
gregations. 

In  consequence  of  such  sad  events  no  traces  have  been  left  of  our 
congregations  in  Italy,  nor  of  those  in  Poland,  Silesia,  Hungary, 
and  Transylvania.  The  Holy  Office,  and  the  Pope's  secular  ad- 
herents and  executioners,  "brought  forth  the  people  that  were 
therein,  and  put  them  under  saws,  and  under  harrows  of  iron,  and 
under  axes  of  iron,  and  made  them  pass  through  the  brick-kiln" 
(2  Samuel  xii.  31). 

In  those  dark  days  they  found  at  times  a  safe  refuge  in  certain 
free  towns,  as  Strasburg,  Nuremberg,  and  Augsburg,  and  in  some 
independent  principalities,  such  as  Hesse,  the  Palatinate,  Alsace, 
the  bishopric  of  Bale,  and,  above  all,  in  Moravia.  The  last-men- 
tioned country  was  for  nearly  a  century  their  Promised  Land. 
Though  the  Heyducs  annoyed  them  now  and  then  by  their  invasions, 
robbing  their  goods,  polluting  their  wives,  and  carrying  off  the  men, 
and  though  Spanish  and  Neapolitan  soldiers,  Wallachians,  Croa- 

*  Each  congregation  was  represented  by  one  or  at  most  two  delegates. 


4-02 

tians,  and  Polanders  alternately  troubled  them  and  often  massacred 
them  in  their  villages,  they  maintained  themselves,  and  their  con- 
gregations increased.  In  1662  they  numbered  no  less  than  20,000 
souls.  They  lived  here  in  a  communistic  organization  of  about 
seventy  colonies,  or  Haushabens,  at  Nikolsburg,  Auspitz,  Aus- 
terlitz,  and  some  other  towns.  But  in  the  days  of  the  Thirty  Years' 
War  they  were  driven  away  by  force  of  arms.  Robbed  of  all  their 
goods,  they  were  sent  into  exile  by  the  Cardinal  von  Dietrichstein 
(1621-22).  Only  a  remnant  of  their  once  flourishing  colonies  had 
survived,  and  even  this  remainder  perished  at  the  time  of  the 
tremendous  Turkish  invasion  of  1665.  The  "very  small  remnant 
left  unto  them"  was  sustained  for  a  time  by  the  financial  help  of 
the  Dutch  Mennonites,  and  found  a  temporary  refuge  in  the  neigh- 
boring parts  of  Hungary;  but  the  very  long  arm  of  the  Jesuits 
finally  reached  them  here,  as  well  as  elsewhere.  In  the  second  half 
of  the  eighteenth  century  the  last  of  them  had  to  emigrate  to  Russia, 
and  whoever  remained  was  forced  to  suffer  Roman  Catholic  re- 
baptism.  My  friend  and  colleague,  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Du  Buy,  recently 
visited  their  descendants  in  Gross-Schutzen  in  Hungary,  and  found 
them  still  living  in  one  of  their  ancient  colony- houses  (Habanerhof). 
They  were  greatly  pleased  at  being  remembered  among  the  Dutch 
Mennonites,  but  themselves  knew  nothing  about  the  sad  history 
of  their  ancestors,  and  the  Dechant  of  the  village  commended  their 
sincere  fidelity  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church!  "Sic  transit  gloria 
mundi!"  The  poor  remainder  of  the  transplanted  Moravian  Men- 
nonites (Huterites)  emigrated  in  1874  from  Hutersthal  in  Russia  to 
South  Dakota,  United  States  of  America,  where  they  founded  five 
churches  with  about  three  hundred  and  fifty  members. 

While  thus  in  Central  Europe  the  light  of  the  candle  was  extin-' 
guished,  the  persecution  in  Holland  had  ceased  in  consequence 
of  the  breaking  of  the  Spanish  yoke.  Here  William  the  Silent  had 
inaugurated  a  long  period  of  toleration.  This  is  the  more  to  be 
praised  since  he  did  so  in  spite  of  the  advice  of  his  friend  and  fellow- 
worker,  Marnix  Lord  St.  Aldegonde,  and  the  malice  of  the  celebrated 
preacher,  Petrus  Dathenus,  who  went  so  far  as  to  call  the  prince, 
on  account  of  his  indulgence  toward  the  Mennonites,  "an  Anti- 
christ and  wicked  man."  The  provincial  and  local  authorities  also 
were  not  seldom  in  disagreement  with  his  liberal  principles,  but 


4°3 

the  noble  prince  stood  firm,  the  champion  of  freedom  of  conscience. 
In  1577,  "a  generation  before  the  birth  of  the  founder  of  Rhode 
Island,"  he  answered  the  opposing  magistrates  of  Middelburg: 
"We  declare  to  you  that  you  have  no  right  to  interfere  with  the  con- 
science of  any  one,  so  long  as  he  has  done  nothing  that  works  in- 
jury to  another  person,  or  a  public  scandal."  It  has  been  conjec- 
tured that  the  benevolent  feelings  of  William  the  Silent  were  partly 
derived  from  his  gratitude  for  the  support  of  two  patriotic  Men- 
nonites,  P.  W.  Bogaert  and  D.  J.  Kortenbosch,  who  in  the  year 
1572,  in  a  pressing  emergency,  made  up  a  sum  of  one  thousand 
guilders,  an  offering  of  some  of  their  coreligionists  in  exile,  and 
brought  it  to  the  prince  in  his  camp  at  Hellenrade  near  Roermond, 
refusing  any  acknowledgment,  but  simply  asking  for  his  friendship. 
Let  this  be  as  it  may,  it  cannot  but  serve  to  the  honor  of  both  parties, 
— to  that  of  the  prince  as  well  as  to  his  clients. 

The  ideals  of  William  the  Silent  were  too  premature  for  a  general 
application  in  his  time.  As  soon  as  he  was  murdered  by  the  treach- 
erous bullets  of  Balthazar  Geraerdts  (1584),  intolerance  reared  itself 
again.  We  must  acknowledge,  however,  that  it  remained  an  intol- 
erance of  small  dimensions,  never  imitating  the  unheard  of  atroci- 
ties of  Roman  Catholic  persecution. 

In  1583  the  States-General,  the  paramount  legislative  power  of 
the  United  Netherlands,  promulgated  the  "resolution"  that  no 
other  divine  service  than  that  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church 
would  be  publicly  allowed.  In  165 1,  after  the  Peace  of  Munster, 
or  the  Westphalian  Peace,  the  Great  Assembly  which  had  to  organ- 
ize definitively  the  republican  government  renewed  this  act.  And, 
though  the  magistrates  generally  connived  in  behalf  of  the  Men- 
nonites  as  well  as  the  Roman  Catholics,  and  in  favor  of  others  who 
attended  their  own  religious  services,  they  always  had  at  hand,  be- 
cause of  this  law,  a  weapon  against  them,  and  occasionally  they 
made  use  of  it.  In  the  province  of  Holland  the  Mennonites  were 
treated  rather  well, — nay,  it  was  even  allowed  them  to  be  married 
in  their  own  churches;  but  in  some  of  the  other  provinces,  as,  for 
instance,  in  Friesland  and  Groningen,  they  lived  not  without  occa- 
sional trouble.  In  the  very  year  of  William  the  Silent's  death,  1584, 
the  States  of  Friesland  empowered  every  Reformed  minister  "and 
other  person"  to  enter  all  sectarian  meetings  and  controvert  the 


404 

preacher  (Mennonite)  and  his  hearers.  Too  zealous  ministers,  not 
always  of  the  highest  standing,  could  not  refrain  from  using  their 
legal  power  and  distressing  their  harmless  compatriots.  In  general, 
it  may  be  said  that  the  Reformed  ministry,  at  any  rate  in  Fries- 
land,  was  not  exempt  from  the  eagerness  of  heretic-hunting. 
Several  Reformed  Synods  insisted  on  the  States  Provincial  plainly 
prohibiting  every  form  of  Mennonite  service  and  all  travelling  of 
Mennonite  elders  and  preachers.  Nay,  they  would  have  closed 
Mennonite  colleges  and  prohibited  the  building  of  Mennonite 
churches!  They  advocated  the  taking  from  the  Mennonites  their 
civil  rights,  and  that  they  be  compelled  to  make  oath,  etc.  In  1601 
two  celebrated  Reformed  ministers,  Bogerman*  and  Geldrop,  trans- 
lated into  Dutch  a  pamphlet  of  Beza,  in  which  the  penalty  of  death 
was  even  recommended  as  the  proper  punishment  of  heretics,  and 
quite  proportionate  to  their  sacrilegious  offences. 

The  States  Provincial,  happily,  did  not  comply  with  these  extrav- 
agances. They  worked,  however,  in  the  same  direction,  though 
on  their  own  lines.  They  required,  in  days  of  large  trouble  and 
war,  large  sums  of  the  Mennonites, — by  way  of  loan,  it  was  pre- 
tended; but  it  was  no  free  loan,  and  they  paid  a  ridiculously  low 
interest.  In  this  way  they  got  in  less  than  ten  years  (1665-72) 
more  than  f.  1,000,000  in  the  two  provinces  of  Friesland  and  Gro- 
ningen  alone.  Of  a  more  inquisitorial  character  were  their  meas- 
ures against  the  Socinian  heresy  amongst  the  Dutch  Mennonites. 
As  I  have  related  in  my  address  at  the  First  International  Council 
of  Unitarians  and  Others  at  London,  f  the  Socinians  Ostorodt  and 
Woidowski  came  to  Amsterdam  in  1590,  and  endeavored  to  enter 
into  relations  with  Hans  de  Ries,  one  of  the  most  prominent  leaders 
of  the  Mennonites  at  that  time.  Afterwards,  in  161 2,  they  tried 
to  win  the  Dutch  Mennonite  congregation  at  Dantzic  in  Prussia. 
Though  they  could  not  succeed  with  Hans  de  Ries,  their  doctrines 
won  the  acceptance  of  other  Mennonite  ministers,  such  as  Jacques 
Outerman,  of  Haarlem,  Nikkert  Obber,  of  Amsterdam,  and  others. 
For  this  intercourse  the  Mennonites  had  to  pay  dearly.  Socinianism 
was  looked  upon  as  little  better  than  Paganism  by  the  leading 
Reformed  ecclesiastics;   and  soon  the  Mennonites  were  said  to  be 

*  The  same  who  presided  over  the  famous  Synod  of  Dordrecht,  1618. 
t  Lee.  cii.,  p.  3x5. 


REV.  NICOLAS  JOZAN 
Budapest,  Hungary 


PROF.  THOMAS  GARRIGUE  MASARYK,  Ph.D. 

Prague,  Bohemia 


MR.  THEO.  BERG 
Copenhagen,  Denmark 


PROF.  OTTO  EMIL  LINDBERG 

Gotheburg,  Sweden 


405 

indocti  Sociniani,  as  the  Socinians  were  called  docti  Mennonitae. 
Not  later  than  1611  a  judicial  inquiry  was  ordered  to  hunt  out 
Socinian  books  and  documents  among  the  Mennonites  at  Franeker. 
In  1722  the  Deputed  States  of  Friesland  required  all  Mennonite 
preachers  to  make  a  Trinitarian  confession.  All  but  one  refused, 
from  which  it  is  not  to  be  concluded  that  all  but  one  of  the  Mennon- 
ite preachers  were  Unitarian  in  1722.  Far  from  that,  but,  as  true 
Mennonites,  they  reprobated  the  imposition  of  a  creed,  whatsoever 
creed  it  might  be.  Their  passive  opposition  succeeded  in  abolishing 
the  odious  law.  It  was  suspended  at  last.  The  base  dealings, 
however,  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  minister  Van  Issen  at  Knype, 
in  1735,  had  bad  consequences  for  two  Mennonite  preachers.  And 
when  the  Frisian  Mennonite  Society,  presided  over  by  the  cele- 
brated Joannes  Stinstra,  of  Harlingen,  interested  itself  for  them,  a 
shower  of  pamphlets  was  discharged  at  this  venerable  man.  If 
only  the  affair  had  stopped  there!  But  their  endeavors  did  not  end 
until  Stinstra  was  made  the  victim  of  their  intolerance.  The  13  th 
of  January,  1742,  he  was  arbitrarily  dismissed,  and  remained  out 
of  office  until  1757.  A  similar  persecution  distressed  the  Mennonites 
at  Blokzyl  in  the  province  of  Overyssel,  whose  preacher,  Jacob 
Hendriks,  was  imprisoned  in  a  subterranean  vault,  where  a  Reformed 
minister,  the  Rev.  Balk,  and  his  daughter,  tried  to  disturb  the  cursed 
Socinian's  mind  by  knocking  and  thumping  at  the  door,  by  yelling, 
and  by  other  tremendous  noises.  After  his  release  the  poor  man 
had  to  submit  to  still  another  injustice, — the  public  sale  of  all  his 
furniture. 

The  despotism  of  the  States  Provincial  was  only  surpassed  by 
some  of  the  local  magistrates.  Here  economic  jealousy  united  with 
dogmatic  disapproval,  for  a  great  many  Mennonite  "burghers"  had 
grown  rich  by  honest  trade,  and  their  material  success  procured 
them  as  many  enviers  as  rivals.  It  was  for  this  reason  that  Men- 
nonites were  excluded  from  some  guilds.  The  Brewers'  Corpora- 
tion at  Deventer  rejected  even  the  son  of  one  of  its  own  officers, 
legally  appointed  by  the  municipality,  in  1684.  That  of  the  Drapers 
seems  to  have  resisted  even  the  intervention  of  the  King  Stadtholder 
William  III.,  1691.  The  town  governments  not  seldom  co-operated 
with  their  burghers.  The  municipality  of  Sneek  prohibited  in 
1 60 1,  under  the  penalty  of  a  fine,  Mennonite  meeting  and  preach- 


4°6 

ing.  The  Rev.  Barend  Jacobsz,  disobeying  the  ordinance,  had  to 
suffer  the  public  sale  of  his  household  goods.  The  municipality  of 
Leeuwarden  prohibited  the  Mennonites  from  keeping  shops,  and 
banished  three  of  their  preachers  (1608).  The  magistrate  of 
Groningen  proclaimed  a  compulsory  ordinance  like  that  of  Sneek, 
and  if  the  town  government,  proud  of  its  autonomy,  had  not  opposed 
i  tself  to  the  still  greater  violence  of  the  States  Provincial,  they  would 
fain  have  gone  further  than  they  did  (1601).  A  few  years  later, 
1608,  the  Stadtholder  William  Louis  of  Nassau, — for  the  rest  a 
sincerely  orthodox  man, — together  with  the  States-General,  inter- 
ceded in  their  favor,  happily  with  success. 

Notwithstanding  all  these  trials  the  Dutch  Mennonite  community 
maintained  its  position,  and  though,  we  must  own,  destitute  of  new 
creative  power,  yet  a  great  many  of  the  congregations  enjoyed  a  flour- 
ishing condition.  Some  of  them  even  grew  proverbially  rich:  let  us 
trust  they  were  rich  also  by  the  blessing  of  the  Most  High.  Perse- 
cution ceased.  More  satisfactory  relations  between  the  Dutch  Re- 
formed Church  and  the  various  sects  were  gradually  established. 
The  French  Revolution  finally  concluded  this  process  of  growth  in 
liberal  opinion,  breaking  a  great  many  old  customs  and  brushing 
away  the  traditional  reverence  for  secular  and  ecclesiastical  despo- 
tism. The  new  constitution  provided  for  freedom  of  worship  and 
equal  civil  rights. 

III. 

The  preceding  pages  treat  of  the  sad  fate  and  of  the  spiritual 
defeat  of  Mennonitism  as  a  self-conscious  international  movement. 
The  Baptizers  of  the  sixteenth  century,  in  Switzerland  as  well  as  in 
Holland  and  elsewhere,  were  not  only  martyrs,  but  also  mission- 
aries, not  only  a  persecuted  sect,  but  also  a  propagandist  one.  Sev- 
eral new  Mennonite  currents  forced  their  spiritual  blood  into  the 
arteries  of  Europe.  The  appearance  of  Felix  Mantz  and  his  friends, 
of  Melchior  Hofmann,  Menno  Simons,  Dirk  Philipsz,  David  Jorisz, 
and  others  had  an  undeniable  missionary  character. 

The  same  cannot  be  said  of  the  history  which  is  to  be  related 
in  the  following  pages.  With  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century 
Mennonitism   ceased    to    be    an    international    movement,   though 


407 

its  international  character  has  in  some  sort  been  preserved  until 
the  present  day. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  the  Swiss  magistrates 
of  Zurich  and  Bern  tried  to  unite  the  Mennonites  with  the  Reformed 
State  churches.  Their  ill-success  in  these  efforts  impelled  them 
to  new  persecution.  The  town  council  of  Bern,  which  had  rejected 
in  1616  a  motion  proposing  to  hire  out  the  Mennonites  as  galley- 
slaves,  was  converted  to  this  injustice  in  1671.  The  Republic  of 
Venice  hired  six  of  them  for  two  years.  This  scandalous  contract 
caused  a  real  panic.  The  weaker  minds  may  have  lapsed. 
The  stronger  characters  saved  themselves  by  fleeing  from  the  scene 
of  this  hideous  persecution.  This  "natural  selection"  obviously 
is  the  reason  why  the  Mennonites  generally  are  such  a  stubborn 
and  conservative  people. 

The  magistrates  of  Zurich  compelled  some  of  our  "defenceless 
lambs  of  Christ"  to  serve  in  the  French  army.  Those  of  Bern 
tried  in  vain  to  get  rid  of  them  by  the  aid  of  the  Dutch  East  India 
Company.  The  directors  of  this  mighty  trading  company,  with 
nearly  sovereign  rights,  did  not  even  reply  to  the  hideous  proposals 
of  Bern.  They  had  no  better  luck  when  they  deported  fifty-six 
Mennonites  to  the  Carolinas.  As  soon  as  they  had  reached  the 
Dutch  frontiers,  they  were  delivered  from  their  chains  by  the  pru- 
dent and  effective  measures  taken  by  our  Mennonite  minister  at 
Nymegen,  the  Rev.  Hendrik  Laurensz. 

The  Dutch  Mennonites  raised  in  those  days  large  funds  for  the  aid 
of  their  brethren  abroad,  and  mainly  by  their  help  the  Swiss  Men- 
nonites succeeded  in  settling  in  Holland,  Germany,  America,  and 
other  countries.  Of  a  somewhat  different  character  was  their 
emigration  into  Russia.  The  government  of  the  Empress  Catherine 
II.,  desiring  to  people  the  large  desolated  provinces  taken  by  force  of 
arms  during  the  last  Turkish  war,  invited  the  Prussian  Mennonites  to 
settle  in  South  Russia.  As  they  had  no  absolutely  safe  abode  in 
Prussia,  they  complied  with  the  invitation,  and  in  the  spring  of 
1788  the  first  Mennonite  caravan  left  their  native  Prussian  soil  to 
become  subjects  of  the  Russian  crown,  though  with  the  privilege  of 
free  worship,  a  gift  of  fertile  fields,  and  other  favors.  They  settled 
in  Retschka  Chortitza.  New  settlements  followed  when  Paul 
I.  ascended  the  throne  and  confirmed  the  privileges  of  the  Mennon- 


408 


ites.  The  threatening  glare  of  the  torch  of  war,  lighted  by  the 
French  Revolution  and  by  the  warlike  dealings  of  Napoleon  Bona- 
parte, then  drove  a  great  many  of  the  wealthy  Mennonites  of  Cen- 
tral Europe  tc  settle  in  the  safe  regions  of  far-off  Russia.  Several 
flourishing  colonies  were  established  on  the  banks  of  the  Molotschna 
and  throughout  the  southern  states  of  the  empire,  a  few  of  them 
even  to  the  east  of  the  Ural  Mountains. 

Led  simply  by  emigrant  desires,  in  1683  a  Mennonite  colony 
settled  in  America.  They  came  from  Crefeld,  were  partly  of  Ger- 
man, partly  of  Dutch  origin,  and  landed  at  Philadelphia,  Pa.  They 
were,  strictly  speaking,  not  the  very  first  Mennonites  in  America; 
for  in  1662  another  colony  of  Dutch  Mennonites  had  settled  in 
New  Netherlands,  at  Hovkill,  near  the  banks  of  the  Delaware,  but 
two  years  later  Sir  Robert  Carr  had  surprised  the  settlement  and 
destroyed  it. 

These  Crefeld  Mennonites  called  their  settlement  Germantown, 
a  name  which  led  to  some  jokes  on  the  ironical  metaplasm  Aermen- 
town  (Town  of  the  Poor).  They  lived  in  very  good  relations  with 
the  Friends,  their  new  countrymen.  This  kind  intercourse  may 
have  induced  the  Society  of  Friends  to  vote  a  sum  of  six  hundred 
guilders  to  the  assistance  of  the  Mennonites  in  the  Palatinate,  in 
1709.  This  did  not,  however,  hinder  the  Mennonites  of  German- 
town  from  protesting  against  slavery.  They  had  not  yet  lived 
five  years  among  their  new  countrymen  and  protectors  when  they 
sent  in  their  appeal  to  the  monthly  meeting  of  the  Friends.  "Would 
any  of  you  like  to  be  treated  as  you  treat  negroes,"  they  asked, 
"to  be  sold  and  made  a  slave  for  life?  How  many  when  sailing 
fear  to  meet  a  Turkish  ship,  lest  they  be  captured  and  made 
slaves.  But  in  what  does  your  conduct  differ  from  the  Turks? 
Nay,  it  is  much  more  hideous,  since  you  pretend  to  be 
Christians!  This  being  so,  we  protest  against  the  deportation 
of  these  people,  thus  unwillingly  stolen  and  sold."  The  Friends 
were  uneasy  and  troubled  by  this  protest,  and  sent  their  in- 
trusive guests  from  pillar  to  post.  Is  not  this  the  manner  with 
many  good  people  who  fear  that  they  will  be  troubled  by  their  own 
principles,  if  acted  up  to  consistently  ?  The  Mennonites  had  finally 
to  permit  themselves  to  be  ignored. 

The  Mennonite  pioneers  in  America  had  to  make  head  against 


4°9 

innumerable  difficulties.  Before  the  coming  of  Willem  Ritting- 
huysen,*  belonging  to  a  Dutch  family  of  paper-makers,  they  even 
lacked  paper.  In  1708  there  was  no  Bible  to  be  had  among  them; 
for  the  pulpit  of  the  First  Mennonite  Church  at  Germantown.. 
When  the  Second  Church  at  Schieback  (Shippack)  had  been  founded,, 
one  of  the  preachers  of  this  new  congregation,  Heinrich  Hunsicker,. 
often  came  over  on  horseback  to  preach  at  Germantown,  and  brought 
his  wife  with  him  on  the  same  horse. 

But  they  stood  firm,  and  gradually  increased.  Several  new  col- 
onies came  over.  In  1709  a  few  Palatine  Mennonites  joined  with 
them.  The  Swiss  persecution  sent  over  many  others.  In  1727 
they  numbered  five  congregations  with  sixteen  preachers,  in  1770 
in  Pennsylvania  alone  forty-two  congregations  with  fifty-three 
pastors  and  fifteen  hundred  members. 

Meanwhile  their  principle  of  non-defence  had  repeatedly  to  stand 
the  test  of  the  invasions  of  the  French  colonists  and  of  Indians, 
and  still  more  in  the  days  of  the  Revolutionary  War.  The  wind 
blew  from  every  corner  in  those  days,  and  neither  the  English 
nor  the  Independents  knew  how  to  value  or  even  understand  their 
neutrality.  Moreover,  a  party  among  the  Mennonites  would  not 
take  part  in  the  Revolution  against  the  "legitimate  authority." 
After  the  treaty  of  peace  these  legitimists  saved  their  consciences 
by  emigrating  to  Canada.  New  troubles  arose  from  the  Civil  War. 
The  Mennonites  of  Virginia  were  forcibly  enlisted  in  the  army  of 
the  Confederacy.  Their  passive  opposition  succeeded,  however, 
in  securing  them  exemption  from  military  duties  by  the  payment 
of  a  fine  of  $500. 

In  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  Mennonites  of  nearly 
all  countries  of  the  Old  World  crossed  the  Atlantic,  drawn  by  the 
great  attractions  of  America,  cheap  land,  and  political  and  religious 
freedom.  In  1820  a  great  many  Swiss  Mennonites  emigrated. 
Between  1836  and  1856  those  of  the  Palatinate,  Hesse,  Bavaria, 
and  Baden  came  over.  A  Dutch  company  of  settlers  left  Friesland 
in  1853,  in  order  to  escape  military  duty.  For  the  same  reason 
thousands  of  Prussian  Mennonites  left  their  native  soil,  and  emi- 
grated in  the  last  quarter  of  the  century.  The  American  Mennon- 
ites raised  several  funds  to  assist  them,  to  a  total  amount  of  $100,- 

*  His  descendants  called  themselves  in  English  Rittenhouse. 


4io 

ooo,  and  guaranteed  a  sum  of  $96,000  advanced  by  the  Canadian 
government,  which  money  was  paid  off  a  few  years  later.  Collect- 
ively, there  are  now  dwelling  in  America  more  than  100,000  Men- 
nonites,  with  more  than  six  hundred  organized  congregations,  which 
is  as  many  as  are  in  Russia  and  even  more  than  are  in  Holland. 

A  few  Mennonites  are  scattered  all  over  the  world  by  the  influence 
of  the  cosmopolitan  time  we  live  in.  These  are  found  everywhere, 
in  East  and  West  India,  South  Africa,  Brazil  and  elsewhere.  But 
they  are  in  want  of  organized  churches,  and  are  being  lost  to  the 
Mennonite  community. 

IV. 

Our  esteemed  friend,  the  Rev.  James  Harwood,  rightly  states  in  his 
"Message  to  Mohammedans"*  that  "much  may  be  gained  for 
the  cause  of  Truth,  as  well  as  that  of  Goodwill,  if  persons,  who  re- 
main attached  to  their  own  Faith,  can  be  induced  to  judge  of  other 
faiths  in  the  spirit  of  justice,  and  perhaps  even  of  appreciation." 
He  judges  the  present  time  to  be  "eminently  favorable  for  making 
such  an  endeavor."  Mennonitism,  too,  has  been  obviously  favored 
by  this  spirit  of  the  age.  Despised  in  former  times,  it  has  been  ex- 
tolled almost  too  greatly  in  our  own.  I  have  already  noticed  this 
fact  in  the  beginning  of  my  paper,  and  I  should  like  to  show  it  more 
amply  here. 

The  Rev.  Griffis,  whose  able  paper  in  the  New  World  of  1895! 
deserves  to  be  mentioned  a  second  time,  pours  on  their  humble  heads 
a  very  cornucopia  of  sympathy.  The  Anabaptist  movement  is,  in 
his  opinion,  "  the  seed-bed  out  of  which  has  grown  nearly  everything 
which  free  and  unpolitical  Christians  value  most  to-day."  He  extolls 
the  Anabaptist  soul,  which  "transmigrated  into  thousands  upon  thou- 
sands of  those  Christians  who  helped  to  make  Republican  Holland, 
the  English  Commonwealth,  and  the  American  Republic."  "This 
soul,"  he  says,  "is  marching  on  in  all  human  society.  Its  incarna- 
tions are  independent  fraternities  of  churches.  One  of  its  noblest 
embodiments  is  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  It  will  have 
even  grander  births  in  centuries  to  come.     As  a  fact  confessed  and 

*  James  Harwood,  B.A.,  "A  Message  to  Mohammedans,"  London,  B.  F.  U.  A.,  1903,  p.  1. 
t  See  above,  p.  398. 


4ii 

gloried  in,  the  main  body  of  their  belief  is  now  held  probably  by  a 
majority  of  Christians  in  the  United  States!" 

Professor  Troeltsch,  one  of  the  most  prominent  German  historians 
and  philosophers  of  the  present  time,  judges  hardly  less  favorably 
the  spiritual  influence  of  the  Baptizers'  movement.*  He  com- 
mends Mennonitism  partly  as  the  renewal  of  Apostolic  Christen- 
dom, relegating  mediation  by  Church,  Dogma,  and  Scripture  to 
individual  religious  institutions,  partly  as  the  cradle  and  origin 
of  modern  life.  Out  of  their  doctrine  of  the  inward  light  modern 
religious  subjectivism  has  developed  itself.  Hence  our  psycho- 
logical, empirical  theology,  considering  religious  traditions  as  causali- 
ties and  symbols  only,  and  valuing  dogmas  as  secondary  causes, 
being  themselves  the  product  of  religious  sentiment,  as  its  first 
cause.  The  true  basis  of  religion  consequently  is  individual  con- 
viction, leaving  room  for  the  most  different  forms  of  expression. 
From  their  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of  all  believers  resulted  the 
idea  of  religious  equality  and  freedom  and  the  emancipation  of 
woman,  though  not  yet  within  the  domain  of  social  and  political 
life.  From  the  Baptizers'  movement  originated  Independentism  as 
well  as  Congregationalism,  claiming  that  the  State,  as  a  mere  out- 
ward institution  for  the  purpose  of  civil  government,  has  no  right 
to  interfere  with  the  inwardness  of  religious  sentiment  or  the  indi- 
vidual conscience.  By  the  English  Revolution  and  German  Pietism 
the  Baptizers '  movement  was  made  an  agent  of  great  importance 
in  the  history  of  civilization.  Under  this  notion  the  religious  doctrine 
of  Schleiermacher  is  but  a  philosophical  explanation  of  the  Bap- 
tizers' ideas  about  the  nature  of  Religion  and  Church.  The  Prot- 
estantism of  to-day  stands  more  near  to  Sebastian  Franck  than  to 
Luther  himself. 

There  is,  I  venture  to  believe,  much  to  be  deducted  from  this 
eulogy,  though  I  do  not  deny  that  the  eye  of  a  stranger  possibly 
sees  us  more  clearly  than  we  ourselves.  Allow  me,  however,  to  re- 
duce it  to  its  true  dimensions. 

The  Mediaeval  Roman  Catholic  Church  had  developed  the  dogma 
of  its  divine  institution.  It  was  believed  that  all  valid  religious 
truth  came  to  mankind  by  the  mediation  of  the  Church.     More- 

*  Troeltsch,  "  Protestantisches  Christentum  und  Kirche  in  der  Gegenwart, "  i.  4  ("Die  Christ- 
liche  Religion'')>  B.  G.  Tuebner,  Berlin  und  Leipzig,  1906,  304  pp.  and  foil. 


412 

over,  the  Church  held  the  keys  of  Heaven  and  the  treasure  of  the 
superfluous  good  works  of  Christ  and  his  saints  at  its  disposal. 
The  eternal  as  well  as  the  temporal  bliss  of  mankind  being  submitted 
to  the  Church,  it  ruled  the  Mediaeval  community,  and  left  no  part 
of  life  outside  the  range  of  its  regulating  power.  The  Pope  was, 
of  course,  deemed  the  Sovereign  of  the  World.  All  civil  govern- 
ment being  subordinated  to  the  Church,  they  had  no  more  glorious 
mission  than  to  uphold  the  Papal  Supremacy  and  to  maintain  the 
ecclesiastic  jurisdiction. 

Living  behind  a  Chinese  wall  of  self-adoration,  the  clergy  did 
not  discern  the  signs  of  the  times.  Barren  scholasticism  and  worldly 
life  lost  for  the  Church  its  power  on  the  souls  of  men.  The  need 
of  reformation  grew  more  and  more  apparent.  By  what  influences 
this  process  was  brought  about  I  need  not  detail. 

In  this  state  of  things  every  social  class  worked  on  its  own  lines 
at  the  cost  of  the  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  Several  governments 
curtailed  the  papal  authority.  Francis  I.,  King  of  France,  claimed 
the  right  of  approving  bishops.  Henry  VIII.,  King  of  England, 
ruled  the  Church  by  the  agency  of  Cardinal  Wolsey.  Ferdinand 
I.  and  Isabella  had  no  less  subordinated  the  Spanish  Church.  The 
Popes,  however,  accepted  their  humiliating  situation  for  fear  of 
being  submitted  to  the  mercy  of  the  Councils.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  scientific  world,  either  humanists  or  theologians,  weary  of  a 
double  bondage  to  Aristotle  and  to  the  Church,  welcomed  the  re- 
vised independent  philosophy  and  theology  of  their  long-hoped-for 
redeemers.  The  mutual  influences  exerted  by  these  higher  ranks 
of  the  community,  the  ruling  and  the  educated  class,  resulted  in 
consolidating  the  Roman  Catholic  and  the  Protestant  National 
Churches  of  France,  England,  the  German  principalities,  Denmark, 
Sweden,  etc. 

Meanwhile,  quite  silently,  a  lower  class,  the  later  so-called  Third 
Estate,  arose.  These  men  had  never  racked  their  brains  in  the 
maze  of  Aristotelian  or  Thomist  philosophy.  They  knew  nothing 
about  the  value  of  the  pagan  culture,  decayed  long  centuries  ago. 
Their  indignation  was  simply  aroused  by  the  extent  to  which  the 
Church  had  allowed  itself  to  become  paganized  and  conformed 
to  this  world.  They  upheld  the  teachings  of  Holy  Scripture  against 
the  traditions  of  the  Church,  represented  by  such  a  corrupt  hierarchy, 


413 

"the  right  of  private  judgment  against  the  dictation  of  ecclesiastical 
authority,  the  individual  responsibility  of  every  human  soul  before 
God  in  opposition  to  the  papal  control  over  purgatorial  punish- 
ments, which  had  led  to  the  degradation  of  venal  indulgences."* 
They  maintained  the  inwardness  of  faith  to  be  the  sole  way  to  eternal 
life,  without  disregarding  the  value  of  works  and  evading  the  ex- 
treme dogma  of  the  total  corruption  of  human  nature.  They  be- 
lieved "that  Christ  said  what  he  meant  and  meant  what  he  said," 
and,  trying  to  take  Jesus  seriously,  they  strove  for  the  purity  of  a 
stainless  religious  community.  To  these  men  the  New  Faith  and 
the  Scripture  were  what  the  study  of  Ancient  Culture  and  the  New 
Theology  were  for  the  educated.  True,  their  convictions  have 
been  modified  by  the  results  of  learned  inquiries:  they  have  been 
compelled  often  to  recognize  the  majority  of  the  great  Reformers. 
But  the  right  of  thinking  and  of  believing  for  one's  self  was  not  sur- 
rendered thereby.  Narrow-minded  and  illiterate  in  part,  they 
sometimes  seemed  to  be  stubborn,  but  they  were  not  unrefiective 
or  inaccessible  to  new  ideas.  It  is  this  middle  class  we  meet  in  the 
Baptizers'  movement,  whose  religious  convictions  found  their  most 
elaborate  exposition  in  the  doctrinal  writings  of  Menno  Simons. 

The  peculiarities  of  Mennonitism,  both  its  organization  and  its 
disorganization,  are  obviously  connected  with  this  origin.  Mennon- 
itism spread  itself  wherever  a  thriving  and  relatively  free  middle 
class  existed, — in  the  Swiss  cantons,  the  Netherlands,  the  free  im- 
perial cities,  and  the  Hanse-towns  of  Germany.  In  other  countries 
their  propagandist  ardor  did  not  succeed. 

Their  individualism  was  one  of  the  results  of  their  origin.  The 
middle  class,  proud  of  their  recently  acquired  civil  rights,  accus- 
tomed to  manage  their  own  affairs, — the  town  government,  the  cor- 
porations, and  the  town  militia, — would  not  allow  their  individuality 
to  be  wronged.  The  Dutch  Mennonites,  especially  those  called 
the  Frisian  and  the  Waterlanders,  did  not  even  like  the  name  of  Men- 
nonite,  for  fear  of  being  judged  spiritual  partisans  of  Menno.  They 
called  themselves  Doopsgesinde;  i.e.,  maintainers  of  adult  baptism. 
In  their  manifold  doctrinal  struggles  they  did  not  even  allow  neu- 
trality: every  one  had  to  think  for  himself  and  to  stand  by  his 
party.     The  congregation  at   Zierikzee,   which  would   not  choose 

♦Henry  Sidgwick,  "Outlines  of  the  History  of  Ethics,"  London,  1802,  p.  154- 


414 

between  the  Frisian  and  the  Flemish  Mennonites,  was  scoffed  at  as 
"stationary  people"  (Stilstaanders),  and  finally  was  excommuni- 
cated by  both  parties.  The  Rev.  Jan  van  Ophoorn,  who  for  the  rest 
acted  in  sober  earnest,  ridiculed  the  Mennonite  individualism  by 
casting  out  successively  all  Frisian  and  Flemish  congregations  and 
ministers,  and  at  last  even  his  own  congregation,  remaining  with 
his  wife  alone  as  the  Good  Shepherd's  true  flock.  A  certain  writer 
of  the  nineteenth  century  has  enumerated  thirty-eight  different  Men- 
nonite sects,  but,  as  we  now  know,  a  complete  list  would  be  at  least 
twice  as  long! 

Mennonite  individualism  caused  a  number  of  doctrinal  and  cere- 
monial differences  between  them.  By  some  sections  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  solemnized  by  foot-washing, — a  ceremony  which  is  still 
used  by  a  few  Mennonite  congregations  in  Germany,  Russia,  and 
America,  and  which  was  practised  in  former  times  by  certain  Dutch 
Mennonites,  not  only  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  but  also  at  the  wel- 
coming of  delegates  of  other  congregations.  Some  of  them  had  no 
audible  prayers  at  their  public  worship,  prayer  being  practised  in  its 
true  nature  as  a  secret  speech  of  each  individual  soul  to  the  heavenly 
Father.  Even  in  so  large  and  important  a  congregation  as  that  of 
Leiden  it  was  not  until  1672  that  the  ministers  prayed  audibly. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  Mennonite  individualism  incidentally 
degenerated  into  a  petrifying  affection  for  insignificant,  exterior 
peculiarities.  At  Sneek,  for  instance,  a  Frisian  town,  there  existed 
two  different  congregations  in  the  eighteenth  century.  Lysbeth 
Hessels,  who  had  changed  her  mind  and  wished  to  pass  from  one 
congregation  into  the  other,  was  only  allowed  to  do  so  on  condition 
that  she  would  change  her  red-speckled  neck-cloth  for  a  blue  one 
(1747).  At  the  same  time  a  member  of  the  congregation  at  Henge- 
loo  was  censured  because  he  wore  a  periwig,  and  a  lady  at  Borne 
was  threatened  with  exclusion  from  the  Lord's  Supper  on  account 
of  her  unusual  cap.  The  congregation  at  Dantzic  in  Prussia  was 
in  those  days  deeply  moved  by  the  question  whether  it  might  be 
allowed  to  wear  periwigs,  and  even  appealed  for  the  mediatorial 
aid  of  the  Mennonites  in  Holland  to  decide  this  matter. 

But  the  bright  side  is  by  no  means  to  be  overlooked.  A  brief 
comparison  makes  clear  what  I  wish  to  say.  The  Lutheran  Church 
restored  the  old  Consistory,  depriving  the  clergy  of  the  right  of 


4i5 

ordination  and  excommunication,  and  so  paved  the  way  for  the 
union  of  Church  and  State  under  one  head.  The  Reformed 
churches  allowed  to  the  secular  governments  the  jus  circa  sacra, 
and  lived  to  regret  that  the  State  had  incidentally  subordinated  the 
Church  even  in  spiritual  concerns.  But  Mennonite  individualism 
did  not  suffer  any  other  meddling  of  the  State  with  their  affairs  than, 
in  temporal  matters. 

Another  beneficial  result  of  Mennonite  individualism  has  been  the 
reprobation  of  any  binding  creed,  every  confession  of  faith  being 
considered  as  a  quite  individual  utterance  of  a  man's  best  self. 
This  basis  of  religious  individualism  enabled  the  Mennonites  to» 
follow  the  progress  of  the  times.  Nothing  but  their  own  back- 
wardness prevented  them  from  introducing  what  was  attractive  in 
the  new  or  from  abolishing  what  was  decrepit  in  the  old. 

The  decidedly  orthodox  character  of  the  confessions  of  some  of 
the  Mennonites,  in  the  age  in  which  we  live  as  well  as  in  former 
times,  cannot  be  denied.  But  Mennonite  orthodoxy  is  ever  a  harm- 
less one.  It  does  not  disapprove  of  individual  departures  in  faith. 
It  does  not  shut  the  gate  to  development.  The  most  incredible 
surprises  are  not  impossible.  The  Mennonites  in  Russia,  South 
Germany,  and  America  are  for  the  most  part  rather  orthodox:  they 
fear  our  new  theology  (our  higher  criticism,  as  they  call  it)  as  a 
seducing  Satan's  work.  Nevertheless,  the  gate  is  already  being 
battered  down,  and  there  is  indeed  no  reason  why  it  should  be  con- 
sidered impossible  that  within  a  century  or  less  they  should  adopt 
liberal  theology  as  thoroughly  as  do  the  large  majority  of  Dutch 
and  West  German  Mennonites. 

Here  it  m,ay  be  added  that  Mennonitism,  though  during  more 
than  three  centuries  rather  ostracized,  never  hesitated  to  extend  the 
hand  of  brotherly  love  to  other  denominations.  Dutch  Mennonites 
not  only  helped  quite  generously  Swiss,  German,  American,  and 
other  brethren  of  their  own  faith  or  origin,  but  also  Huguenots  and 
others.  And  this  by  no  means  scantily.  In  1685  the  Waterlander 
Mennonite  congregation  at  Leiden  collected  at  one  divine  service  no 
less  than  2,189.17  f.  on  behalf  of  the  French  refugees.  Three 
years  later  they  collected  again  at  an  ordinary  service  nearly  an- 
other 1,000  f.  for  the  same  purpose.  The  guilder  then  was  worth 
more  than  a  dollar  now.     "  Ex  ungue  leonem!" 


416 

Six  years  ago  I  introduced  the  Mennonites  to  our  First  Interna- 
tional Congress  as  a  community  of  religious  radicals.  This  char- 
acterization receives  its  historical  explanation  by  my  remarks  to-day. 
The  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth-century  middle  class  was  based  on 
the  same  principle  as  the  Reformation  generally.  The  Smalkaldian 
articles  of  1537,  for  instance,  as  well  as  the  writings  of  Menno  Simons, 
accepted  what  our  friend,  the  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte,  six  years 
ago,  called  the  American  theory  concerning  the  relations  between 
Church  and  State.*  They  recognized  no  less  the  sovereignty  of  the 
Church,  the  priesthood  of  believers,  and  the  authority  of  Scripture. 
But  only  the  religious  middle  class,  self-conscious  and  self-regulating 
within  the  walls  of  Mennonitism,  was  to  prove  itself  consistent  with 
these  principles. 

As  we  find  Jesus  "the  great  type  of  practical  faith,"  it  needs 
hardly  to  be  said  that  the  religion  of  this  middle  class  of  people,  who 
"took  Jesus  seriously,"  was  of  a  practical  kind.  Their  opponents 
could  not  appreciate  this  peculiarity.  The  Archbishop  of  Cologne 
denounced  them  as  "Protestant  Jesuits"  (1672).  Ubbo  Emmius, 
a  celebrated  historian,  yet  full  of  sixteenth-century  Reformed  preju- 
dice, charged  them  with  weak  integrity.  A  Lasco  only  acknowl- 
edged their  honesty  and  probity.  In  truth,  their  charity  was  at  once 
generous  and  thoughtful.  When,  in  former  centuries,  one  of  the  in- 
mates of  theMennonite  Old  People's  Home  at  Leiden  died,  the  officers 
(deacons)  of  the  congregation  were  obliged  to  attend  the  funeral. 
In  my  own  congregation,  at  Makkum,  this  unwritten  law  of 
brotherly  love  and  piety  has  been  maintained  till  the  present  time. 
Sick  people  formerly  were  attended  by  the  lady  members  of  the 
congregation,  at  Leiden  and  elsewhere,  according  to  the  list  which 
the  deacons  made  for  this  purpose.  At  present  our  larger  congre- 
gations have  arranged  for  district  nursing. 

Drawing  to  a  close  this  survey,  I  hope  to  have  pointed  out  the 
morsel  of  truth  which  is  to  be  acknowledged  in  the  eulogy  of  our 
recent  panegyrists.  Wishing  to  meet  the  question  fairly,  we  must 
concede,  however,  that  the  virtues  we  found  were  not  so  much  the 
results  of  special  Mennonite  principles  as  they  were  the  particular 
merits  of   the  social  class  to  which  our  ancestors  belonged.    That 

♦See  "Liberal    Religious   Thought,"   etc.    (First    London    Congress  of    Unitarian  and 
Other  Religious  Liberals,  iooi),  page  79. 


417 

these  virtues  are  no  longer  our  private  property,  but  are  more 
and  more  adopted  by  others,  is  but  one  of  the  signs  of  the  de- 
veloping democratic  tendency  of  the  present  age. 

Is  Mennonitism  destined  to  take  part  in  the  furthering  of  this 
tendency  ?  Will  our  Mennonite  spirit  "  have  even  grander  births  in 
centuries  to  come,"  as  Rev.  Griffis  expects.  It  remains  to  be  seen, 
though  I  must  confess  my  unbelief.  For  accomplishing  such  a  task 
Mennonitism  should  be  a  missionary  church.  But  it  has  ceased  to 
keep  alive  the  propagandist  ardor  of  the  sixteenth  century.  More- 
over, the  very  stimulus  of  such  missionary  ardor  fails,  for  it  is  no 
longer  possessed  by  any  dominant  idea. 

It  shares  in  this  respect  the  fate  of  nearly  all  historical  churches 
of  the  time.  Missionary  churches,  in  the  proper  meaning  of  the 
word,  are  not  in  harmony  with  the  age.  The  great  spiritual  cur- 
rents of  the  present  day  go  beyond  the  churches. 

Happily,  this  does  not  matter  much.  The  Spirit  of  God  works  on 
its  own  lines;  is  not  confined  in  the  prison  of  human  organization. 
God  himself  is  building  up  his  kingdom,  which  is  based  on  eternal 
truths, — truths  which  are  not  to  be  undermined  by  the  changing 
order  of  human  society.  The  fundamental  truths  of  life  will  endure 
forever,  whatever  may  happen. 

"  Our  little  systems  have  their  day, 

They  have  their  day  and  cease  to  be: 

They  are  but  broken  lights  of  thee, 

And  thou,  O  Lord,  art  more  than  they." 

Tennyson. 

If  it  is  so  with  our  spiritual  systems,  it  is  all  the  more  so  with 
the  churches  embodying  those  systems.  Consequently,  we  acquiesce 
in  the  fading  away  of  many  outward  peculiarities.  For  beyond  the 
boundaries  of  denominational  devotion  we  are  touched  by  the 
eternal  unity  of  religious  aspiration  in  the  sensitive  heart  of 
mankind. 


4i8 


THE  BURDEN  AND  BLESSING  OF  TRADITION. 

BY  PROF.   DR.   MARTIN  RADE,    OF  THE   UNIVERSITY  OF   MARBURG. 

In  tradition  the  past  speaks  to  us.  The  past  of  our  race  appeals 
to  us  in  the  uttered,  written,  and  printed  word,  in  existing  custom 
and  valid  law.  The  man  of  to-day  is  compelled  to  determine  his 
attitude  toward  this  tradition,  whether  he  may  wish  to  do  so  or  not. 

In  the  tradition  which  speaks  to  us  of  the  past  of  our  religion 
there  lies  both  a  burden  and  a  blessing  for  the  religious  man  of  to-day. 
We  will  treat  first  of  the  burden  of  tradition. 


I. 

How  many  who  would  gladly  be  religious  and  earnestly  desire  to 
be  Christians  are  afraid  of  this  burden!  Others  drag  it  along  and 
groan  beneath  it.     "Woe  to  thee,  that  thou  hast  forbears!" 

For  the  Catholics,  according  to  their  own  express  declaration,  the 
only  proper  attitude  toward  ecclesiastical  tradition  is  one  of  sub- 
missive acceptance.  By  means  of  it  they  prove  the  genuineness  of 
their  faith.  It  is  indeed  said  of  Protestantism  that  it  has  rejected 
-the  Catholic  Church's  principle  of  tradition.  But  no  one  can  really 
be  a  member  of  a  Protestant  church  without  having  the  claims  and 
influence  of  tradition  brought  home  to  him  in  various  forms,  as  doc- 
trine, cult,  custom,  or  law.  Those  parents  in  Bremen  who  had  their 
children  baptized  without  the  use  of  the  formula,  "in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  afterwards  lived  to  see 
the  Senate  declare  these  baptisms  invalid,  so  that  they  were  com- 
pelled either  to  have  their  children  rebaptized  or  allow  them  to 
remain  outside  the  communion  of  the  Christian  Church,  are  a  striking 
example  of  this  in  recent  times. 

What  makes  religious  tradition  burdensome  and  oppressive  to  the 
mind  of  modern  men? 


419 

i.  First  of  all,  it  is  the  strangeness  of  tradition  which  is  felt.  Nu- 
merous customs,  opinions,  etc.,  do  not  seem  strange  to  our  mind  or 
foreign  to  our  mode  of  feeling,  although  they  have  been  handed 
down  to  us  by  tradition,  because  they  live  in  us  and  we  in  them.  But 
every  tradition  may  become  a  burdensome  yoke  to  us,  in  less  or 
greater  degree,  as  soon  as  we  perceive  that  it  has  come  to  us  from  a 
world  which  is  not  our  own  present  world;  and  from  what  an- 
cient, distant,  and  strange  time  has  not  a  large  part  of  that  which  the 
Church  submits  to  us  as  religiously  valuable  and  necessary  descended! 

Under  the  supremacy  of  the  dogma  of  inspiration  the  Bible  ap- 
peared to  our  fathers  to  be  a  timeless  book.  In  every  word  of  the 
Bible  the  eternal  spirit  of  God  spake  to  man  of  things  which  indeed 
concerned  this  mundane  world  also,  but  which  happened  in  the  main 
under  quite  different  conditions  from  those  under  which  we  live. 
The  thought  that  in  the  Bible  story  we  also  have  to  deal  with  history, 
and  that  in  these  Biblical  books  we  also  have  to  do  with  the  works  of 
human  historians,  did  not  enter  their  consciousness. 

To-day,  as  ever,  the  devout  man  hears  the  voice  of  God  speaking 
in  the  Bible.  But  he  knows  well  that  it  did  not  fall  from  heaven  all 
complete,  and  that  it  is  not  one  book,  that  it  is  not  a  collection  of  sa- 
cred oracles,  which  it  is  only  necessary  to  open  in  order  to  draw  upon 
stores  of  superhuman  wisdom.  He  knows  that  the  Bible  contains  a 
whole  literature  to  which  writers  the  most  different  have  contributed 
throughout  a  period  of  fifteen  hundred  years  (1500  B.C.  to  150  a.d.). 
True,  this  literature  possesses  a  certain  inner  unity,  and  to  grasp 
this  is  highest  gain;  but  what  impresses  the  modern  reader  first  of 
all  is  the  manifold  difference  and  variety  in  the  spirit  of  these  writers, 
and  the  strange  and  foreign  nature  of  their  material.  The  customs 
and  manners,  the  language  and  mode  of  expression,  the  aesthetic 
feeling  and  conception  of  the  world,  which  he  finds  in  these  writers, 
are  all  strange  and  foreign  to  his  mind.  Indeed,  how  could  it  be 
otherwise  at  this  distance  of  centuries?  Whoever  possesses  suffi- 
cient naivete  to  close  his  eyes  to  all  these  things  may  live  on  very 
comfortable  terms  with  the  old  faith,  but  the  number  of  such  Chris- 
tians is  perceptibly  and  steadily  diminishing. 

The  Old  Testament  gives  most  offence  and  is  the  greatest  stum- 
bling-block in  this  direction.  When  sun  and  moon  stand  still  at  the 
command  of  Joshua,  all  our  ideas  derived  from  the  Copernican 


420 

astronomy,  according  to  which  the  sun  actually  stands  still,  or  rela- 
tively still,  are  contradicted.  Even  if  we  translate  the  occurrence 
into  the  terms  of  the  Copernican  view  of  the  world,  so  that  Joshua's 
command  had  regard  to  the  earth  instead  of  the  sun,  even  then  this 
wonder  story  remains  absolutely  foreign  to  our  way  of  thinking. 
We  simply  cannot  put  ourselves  in  the  place  of  those  ancient  narra- 
tors and  hearers  whose  conception  of  nature  allowed  them  to  accept 
the  story  without  even  a  shrug.  To  keep  within  the  limits  of  the 
familiar  and  well  known,  we  will  mention  here  only  the  story  of  the 
floating  iron  (2  Kings  vi.)  and  the  narrative  of  the  creation.  It  is 
true  that  it  is  just  these  stories  whose  ideal  content  is  clearest,  so  that, 
in  spite  of  all  difficulties,  it  may  be  easily  discerned  in  all  its  great- 
ness, even  by  the  dullest  apprehension;  but  the  strange,  foreign, 
exotic  element  is  still  there,  and  there  are  many  who  never  get  beyond 
it.  Worse  by  far  are  the  moral  difficulties.  That  a  prophet  should 
be  allowed  to  curse  twenty-four  little  boys  and  deliver  them  to  be  con- 
sumed by  bears  because  they  called  him  '  'Baldhead "  is  contrary  to 
our  moral  sense  and  ethical  feeling.  For  that  very  reason  this  story 
(2  Kings  ii.  23)  is  no  longer  told  in  the  schools,  as  it  was  in  my  school- 
days. And,  in  reading  the  beautiful  137th  psalm,  is  it  not  like  re- 
ceiving a  blow  in  the  face  to  hear  that  touching  vow  of  loyal  alle- 
giance, "If  I  forget  thee,  O  Jerusalem,  let  my  right  hand  forget  her 
cunning,"  followed  by  the  vengeful  malediction  upon  Babylon, — 
"Happy  shall  he  be  that  taketh  and  dasheth  thy  little  ones  against 
the  stones."  But  the  whole  history  of  Israel  is  full  of  such  moral 
difficulties.  It  tells  of  the  blood  of  children  shed  at  the  command 
of  God;  and  how  often  do  we  not  read  that  at  God's  command  whole 
cities  and  peoples  were  "devoted"  or  "accursed"!  There  are  those 
who  do  not  mind  or  are  not  troubled  by  the  presence  of  such  stories 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  who  can  make  light  of  such  difficulties.  There 
are  those  who  think  they  can  set  everything  right  by  harmonizing 
these  statements  with  our  moral  sense  in  a  superficial  way,  as  a  silly 
and  over-subtle  science  of  apologetics  has  tried  to  do  only  too  often; 
but,  after  all  has  been  done  and  said,  how  strange  and  foreign  all 
this  still  seems  to  us! 

In  the  New  Testament  we  indeed  breathe  another  atmosphere. 
Here  everything  seems  more  familiar  and  friendly  to  us,  thanks  not 
only  to  our  early  instruction,  but  because  the  spirit  of  these  Script- 


421 

ures  is  a  still  living  spirit  to-day,  because  this  life-giving  spirit  con- 
tinues to  animate  and  vivify  our  own  generation.  But  let  the  neo- 
phyte open  the  Revelation  of  John,  and  its  riddles  and  enigmas  will 
press  upon  his  mind  with  alpine  weight,  or,  if  he  does  not  take  them 
seriously,  they  will  repel  him.  Paul  is  probably  tolerably  intelli- 
gible in  great  part  even  among  the  men  of  to-day;  but  he  has  trains 
of  thought  which  mock  and  defy  our  efforts  to  comprehend  them 
without  the  help  of  learned  commentators,  to  say  nothing  of  such 
genuinely  rabbinical  passages  as  Galatians  iv.  24.  How  much  there  is 
that  is  strange  and  foreign  to  us  in  the  circumstances  and  traditions 
of  the  primitive  Christian  community,  and  in  the  phenomena  in 
which  the  life  and  spirit  of  that  community  uttered  and  expressed 
itself!  such  as  the  speaking  in  tongues  (1  Cor.  xiv.),  the  women  with 
faces  closely  veiled  (1  Cor.  xi.  4,  ss.),  the  community  of  goods,  the 
multitude  of  miracles  in  the  Acts  and  the  Gospels,  mostly,  it  is  true, 
of  a  more  spiritual  character  than  those  of  the  Old  Testament, 
though  still  including  the  raising  of  the  dead,  walking  on  the  sea, 
the  feeding  of  five  thousand,  the  cursing  and  withering  of  the  fig-tree. 
Finally  there  is  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  acknowledged  to  be,  to- 
gether with  the  parables,  the  highest  and  purest  efflorescence  of  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  How  much  there  is  here  which  gives  us  pause 
by  its  utter  foreignness  of  spirit!  I  will  mention  only  the  saying 
about  the  right  and  left  cheeks,  and  the  admonition,  "Give  to  him 
that  asketh  of  thee,  and  from  him  that  would  borrow  of  thee  turn 
thou  not  away," — a  precept  which  judicious  charity  alone  often 
forbids  us  to  follow. 

What  is  true  of  the  Bible  in  this  respect  is  also  true  of  the  liturgi- 
cal tradition  of  public  worship,  of  the  dogmatic  tradition  of  the 
catechism,  and  of  every  form  of  venerable  doctrine,  ceremony,  and 
form. 

2.  The  second  weakness  of  tradition  is  its  uncertainty. 

Men  have  indeed  tried,  here  by  an  infallible  institution  and  there 
by  an  infallible  Scripture,  to  make  up  for  this  deficiency;  but,  de- 
spite all,  tradition  has  ever  revealed  its  own  unreliable  and  uncertain 
nature. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  a  fact  which  I  have  seen  with  my  own 
eyes,  and  have  had  opportunity  to  prove,  is  one  thing,  and  a  fact  of 
which  I  simply  have  the  historical  knowledge,  that  some  one  else 


422 

claims  to  have  seen  and  proven  it,  is  quite  another  thing.  That  which 
is  given  in  tradition,  we  may  believe,  was  once  a  present  actuality, 
was  seen,  heard,  and  experienced ;  but  in  the  very  moment  when  it 
became  of  the  past,  when  it  became  only  the  report  of  eve-witnesses, 
and  very  soon  only  the  report  of  that  report,  it  lost  immensely  in 
reality  and  reliability.  Formerly,  little  attention  was  paid  to  this. 
A  naive  historical  method  controlled  the  selection  of  events,  and  what 
it  chose  to  transmit  was  accepted  as  the  authentic  tradition;  the 
naivete  of  the  presentation  was  met  by  an  equally  nai've  and  uncritical 
willingness  to  accept  what  was  presented.  The  entire  history  of 
antiquity  and  of  the  Middle  Ages  is  under  this  indictment:  faithful 
reports,  upon  which  one  may  depend  even  to-day  are  found  side 
by  side  with  monstrous  fables.  There  came  the  time  when  men 
became  cognizant  of  this  unreliability  of  tradition:  criticism  arose. 
Laurentius  Valla,  the  humanist  (-1457),  destroyed  the  legend  of  the 
"donatio  Constantini " ;  and  others,  such  as  Hutten  and  Luther, 
profited  by  his  instruction.  Flaccius,  the  Lutheran,  sharply  as- 
sailed the  papal  view  of  history,  and  Gottfried  Arnold,  in  the  in- 
terests of  pietism,  unmercifully  turned  the  conception  of  church 
history,  which  scholastic  orthodoxy  had  worked  out,  topsy-turvy. 
Criticism  at  first  subserved  a  polemical  interest;  dogmatic  bias  and 
prejudice  opened  the  eyes  of  men  to  the  weak  points  in  a  hostile 
tradition.  Leibnitz  was  the  first  to  introduce  regular  methods  and 
scientific  canons  into  historical  research:  by  rejecting  all  unfounded 
traditions  he  showed  the  necessity  of  investigation  and  of  a  consist- 
ent use  and  dependence  upon  the  original  sources  throughout. 
Leibnitz  died  in  17 16:  the  eighteenth  century  developed  great  skill 
and  learning  in  the  discovery  of  isolated  facts  and  events  and  the  con- 
nection between  them.  Upon  this  rests  the  fame  of  the  theologian 
Semler  (17  2  5-1 791).  But  it  took  another  generation  to  see  the  larger, 
more  coherent  view  and  the  vaster  connections.  Lessing,  Herder, 
Goethe,  and  Hegel  were  the  pioneers:  under  their  leadership  the 
sifting  of  details  proceeded  all  the  more  freely  and  thoroughly.  So 
in  the  nineteenth  century  we  saw  the  rise  of  a  new  and  heretofore 
unknown  science  of  historical  investigation  and  presentation.  Two 
schools  may  be  distinguished  in  Germany:  the  Niebuhr-Ranke 
school,  which  has  made  good  its  claim  to  undisputed  leadership  in 
the  work  of  exact  research,  whose  prime  inquiry  is  always  and  every- 


423 

where,  "What  did  actually  happen?"  and  the  Heidelberg  school, 
founded  by  Frederick  Christopher  Schlosser,  whose  most  brilliant 
representative  in  recent  times  is  perhaps  Treitschke,  which  freely 
passes  its  ethical  judgment  upon  that  which  has  been,  and  always 
strives  to  attain  a  unitary  conception  of  the  whole.  These  two 
schools  supplement  and  complement  each  other  in  the  most  fortunate 
manner.  To  these  may  be  added  a  third  school  or  tendency  which 
takes  into  consideration  the  economic  foundations  of  human  society 
in  the  various  stages  of  historical  development.  There  is  much 
justification  for  this,  though  a  one-sided  emphasis  has  been  put  upon 
it.  The  Frenchman  Taine  and  the  German  Lamprecht  deserve 
special  mention  in  this  connection.  The  universal  endeavor  was  to 
get  back  to  the  oldest  and  most  reliable  sources  of  tradition,  and  so  a 
grand  and  commendable  emulation  in  the  discovery  and  publication 
of  original  sources  accompanied  the  rise  of  the  new  science  of  history. 
The  active  participation  of  church  historians  and  of  the  historians  of 
religion  in  this  great  activity  in  the  field  of  profane  history  was  in- 
evitable: such  names  as  Ferdinand  Christian  Baur,  Hase,  Weis- 
zacker,  Wellhausen,  and  Harnack  will  suffice  to  indicate  this. 

The  task  of  giving  a  positive  estimate  of  the  significance  and  the 
vocation  of  historical  criticism  we  must  reserve  for  some  future  time. 
Our  present  concern  is  to  point  out  one  of  its  fatal  consequences. 
The  layman,  who  could  not  keep  up  with  all  this  learned  research, 
has  become  confused.  At  first  he  probably  rejoiced  in  the  scholarly 
work  of  one  great  authority  or  author,  and  was  ready  to  swear  either 
by  Rotteck,  Gervinus,  or  Leo.  But  very  soon  he  was  overcome  and 
oppressed  by  a  sense  of  uncertainty.  The  authorities  arrived  at 
different  results.  They  pointed  out  the  inconsistencies  in  the  old 
tradition,  but  they  contradicted  each  other  even  worse.  In  the  place 
of  that  which  had  been  reported  there  came  endless  questions  and 
ever  new  problems.  What  was  there  still  left?  What  could  be  de- 
pended on?  Can  science  deceive,  or  is  it  her  rightful  business  to 
resolve  everything  into  merely  relative  truths  or  into  a  universal  scep- 
ticism, replying  to  every  inquiry,  "It  may  have  been  so,  or  it  may 
have  been  otherwise"?  Where  shall  we  look  for  the  facts?  And 
what  was  Christianity,  this  historically  developed  and  established 
religion,  founded  on  and  boastful  of  facts,  and  yet  without  rock- 
bottom  facts  on  which  to  posit  its  claims? 


424 

It  is  incalculable  how  much  unrest  and  uneasiness  has  been  pro- 
duced in  the  minds  of  religious  people  by  this  destructive  and  under- 
mining work  of  an  historical  criticism  against  which  even  the  sacred 
tradition  of  the  Church  has  not  been  able  to  assert  its  complete 
assurance.  Many  cherished  opinions  might  easily  be  surrendered, 
but  on  others  the  very  heart's  blood  of  faith  depended. 

Let  us  picture  the  situation  to  ourselves  by  means  of  illustrations 
taken  from  the  story  of  the  Reformation.  The  early  biographies  of 
Luther  relate  that  Luther  entered  the  monastery  in  1505  because  his 
friend  Alexius  had  been  struck  by  lightning  at  his  very  side.  A 
more  critical  history  teaches  now  that  one  of  his  friends,  whose  name 
is  unknown,  met  with  some  great  misfortune  about  that  time,  whose 
precise  nature  is  also  unknown,  although  one  source  reports  that  he 
was  stabbed.  All  that  remains  of  the  old  story  is  the  admission  that 
Luther  did  indeed  experience  a  severe  thunder-storm,  which  came 
upon  him  suddenly  like  "a  terror  from  on  high,"  about  fourteen  days 
before  his  entrance  into  the  monastery.  The  old  simple  story  is 
discredited;  but  what  does  it  matter? 

Secondly,  we  have  been  taught  that  at  the  Diet  of  Worms,  in  1521, 
Luther  acted  most  courageously  and  stood  his  ground  like  a  man,  at 
last  crying  out,  "Here  I  stand:  I  cannot  do  otherwise,  God  help  me!" 
Criticism  declares  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  Luther  ever  really  spoke 
these  words.  After  Luther's  examination  the  session  of  the  diet  was 
dissolved  amid  considerable  tumult  and  confusion.  Luther  called 
out  something;  but  who  understood  it,  and  who  preserved  his 
words  ?  Nevertheless,  it  is  impossible  to  deny  that  the  old  report 
may  be  true. 

Thirdly,  in  regard  to  Luther's  death  in  1546.  Catholics  have 
lately  essayed  to  prove  that  Luther  committed  suicide.  Other 
Catholic  investigators  have  themselves  contradicted  this  assertion. 
We  may  affirm  that  critical  historians  have  unanimously  refused  to 
accept  this  precious  historical  find  of  a  partisan  school  of  history. 
But  is  not  the  mere  fact  that  such  an  attempt  could  be  made  at  all 
most  significant?  Are  the  facts  concerning  Luther's  death  so  un- 
certain? May  not  this  professed  discovery  contain  a  grain  of  truth 
after  all  ?  And,  if  so,  how  could  Protestantism  meet  the  situation  ? 
To  what  extent  are  we  dependent  upon  historical  opinions  of  which 
criticism,  apparently,  may  deprive  us  any  day? 


425 

We  have  purposely  refrained  from  illustrating  the  uncertainty  of 
tradition  from  the  Bible.  Nor  do  we  intend  to  do  so  now.  The 
doubts  concerning  the  historical  content  of  the  Bible  are  as  innumer- 
able as  its  contents.  Nothing  is  any  longer  certain.  Even  the  his- 
torical existence  of  Jesus  has  been  questioned.  But  we  wish  rather 
to  point  out  another  example  of  special  significence.  The  evangelical 
churches  have  as  their  foundation  certain  symbols.  The  three  oldest 
of  these  are  called  oecumenical;  that  is,  universal  symbols,  creeds 
recognized  by  the  whole  of  Christendom.  They  are  the  Apostles' 
Creed  and  the  Nicene  and  Athanasian  Creeds.  Historical  science  is 
now  a  unit  in  declaring  that  none  of  these  creeds  can  be  called  oecu- 
menical in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word.  The  Athanasian  Creed  has 
nothing  to  do  with  Athanasius  (fourth  century) ,  and  is  post-Augustinian, 
originating  in  the  sixth  century,  and  was  never  used  in  the  Orient. 
The  Nicene,  or  Nicene-Constantinopolitan,  Creed  was  formulated 
neither  at  Nicaea  in  325  a.d.  nor  in  Constantinople  in  381;  and,  even 
if  adopted  in  Constantinople,  the  synod  which  met  there  was  not 
oecumenical,  but  simply  oriental.  The  apostles  had  nothing  to  do 
with  the  origin  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.  In  its  original  form  it  belongs 
to  the  second  century,  and  its  present  wording  dates  from  a  much 
later  period.  Once  again  we  are  constrained  to  ask,  If  such  historical 
errors  have  been  brought  to  light  in  regard  to  documents  with  such 
abundant  sanctions  as  these  ancient  creeds,  what  is  there  that  still 
remains  firm?  Does  religious  faith  depend  upon  the  work  of  the 
historical  critic?  Does  it  stand  or  fall  with  the  results  which  criti- 
cism has  already  accomplished  or  is  still  to  accomplish  ?  Is  that  the 
value  or  the  meaning  of  tradition? 

Who  can  bear  the  weight  of  such  uncertainty?  Go  to,  let  us  cast 
off  the  burden!     But  hold,  that  cannot  be;  for 

3.  Tradition  asserts  its  tyrannical  sway  over  us,  whether  we  will 
it  or  not,  and  this  from  our  very  first  breath.  Without  weapons  or 
defence  the  child  is  exposed  to  the  influence  of  the  tradition  which 
presses  upon  him  in  home  and  school,  and  from  the  whole  environ- 
ment in  which  he  grows  up,  regardless  of  whether  it  be  a  religious 
or  an  irreligious,  a  conservative  or  a  democratic  tradition. 

Individual  experience,  freedom  of  faith,  living  in  the  Eternal  as 
an  ever-present  reality, — this  is  genuine  religion.  But  now  she  forces 
herself  upon  the  mind  of  youth  in  the  most  tyrannical  way,  urging 


426 

the  acceptance  of  doctrines  only  half  understood,  and  demanding 
to  be  appropriated  by  mechanical  memorizing,  according  to  the 
prevailing  methods  in  home  and  school. 

But  tradition  also  exerts  the  same  tyranny  over  the  life  of  the  adult, 
in  various  degrees,  according  to  his  station  and  manner  of  life.  Both 
in  the  state  and  in  society  certain  privileges  and  opportunities  depend 
upon  our  attitude  towards  tradition.  In  Germany,  at  least,  the  de- 
mand for  the  production  of  a  certificate  of  baptism  or  of  confirma- 
tion is  usual  in  purely  civil  affairs.  One  cannot  aspire  to  certain 
offices  nor  look  forward  to  a  career  unless  he  is  able  to  show  that  his 
attitude  towards  church  and  tradition  has  been  correct  and  re- 
spectful. 

Was  it  always  thus  ?  Well,  it  has  even  been  worse.  In  the  seven- 
teenth century  not  only  the  pastors,  but  all  state  officials,  all  university 
teachers,  including  even  the  fencing  and  dancing  masters,  were 
obliged  to  subscribe  to  the  Lutheran  confessions.  In  many  countries 
this  obligation  continued  in  force  for  all  faculties  of  the  university 
until  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.  What  did  it  matter, 
then,  in  praxi,  that  the  Lutheran  confession  itself  declared  the 
Holy  Scriptures  to  be  the  norma  normans;  i.e.,  the  only  authoritative 
source  of  pure  doctrine,  so  long  as  the  confession  itself,  as  the  norma 
normata,  was  the  real  law,  according  to  which  one  must  be  judged 
and  the  norm  to  which  one  must  conform.  It  was  in  order  to  pre- 
serve and  protect  the  correct  tradition  that  Chancellor  Crell  was 
beheaded  in  Dresden  in  1601   and  Servetus  was  burned  in  Geneva 

in  1553- 

In  15 19  Luther  burned  the  canonical  law  in  Wittenberg,  and 
thereby  declared  war  against  that  law  in  the  name  of  religion.  Not 
that  religious  communities  have  no  use  for  laws  and  fixed  traditions 
in  the  maintenance  of  outward  order.  Law  arises  of  its  own  accord 
wherever  men  seek  to  live  together.  But  it  is  another  question 
whether  the  law  of  the  jurist  is  still  equal  to  its  task  where  the  inner- 
most sanctities  of  the  human  soul  are  concerned.  But,  it  may  be 
said,  law  does  not  seek  to  regulate  faith:  it  simply  holds  to  precedent 
and  tradition.  Just  so,  but  it  strengthens  these,  so  that  through 
the  support  of  the  law  they  gain  quite  a  different  power  and  influ- 
ence than  they  would  otherwise  have. 

Since  when  does  this  union  or  alliance  of  law  and  tradition  exist 


427 

in  Christendom?  We  can  give  the  exact  date.  It  is  since  dogma 
was  completed  and  became  valid  law  in  the  exact  juridical  sense.  It 
was  on  the  27th  of  February,  a.d.  380,  when  the  Emperor  Theodosius 
issued  the  following  decree: — 

"We  command  all  peoples  that  are  subject  to  our  benign  rule  to 
live  by  the  religion  which  the  Apostle  Peter  delivered  to  the  Romans; 
i.e.,  that  they  believe  in  the  one  godhead  of  the  Father  and  of  the 
Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  equal  majesty  in  the  one,  holy,  adorable 
trinity.  They  who  follow  this  decree  shall  be  called  Catholic  Chris- 
tians; the  others,  who  shall  be  as  fools  and  madmen  in  our  eyes, 
shall  be  branded  with  the  shameful  name  of  heretic.  Their  places  of 
meeting  shall  not  be  called  churches,  and  to  whatever  punitive  judg- 
ment of  God  shall  befall  them,  there  shall  be  added  also  such  chastise- 
ment by  us  as  we  shall  determine  and  as  the  will  of  God  may  in- 
dicate to  us." 

At  that  very  time  the  moral,  social,  and  scientific  or  scholastic 
compulsion  which  tradition  already  commanded  was  reinforced  by 
the  compulsion  of  the  law  of  the  state.  From  this  time  on  Christian 
governments  accorded  privileges,  protection,  and  preference, — honor 
and  riches  to  some,  and  disfavor,  persecution,  martyrdom,  and  death 
to  others,  according  to  their  respective  attitudes  towards  tradition. 
Even  more,  they  fixed  and  determined  the  tradition.  And,  as  this 
edict  of  Theodosius  still  stands  at  the  head  of  the  corpus  juris  from 
which  our  jurists  derive  their  knowledge  of  Roman  law,  so  even 
to-day,  despite  all  progress  and  freedom  of  faith  and  conscience,  the 
delusion  that  the  political  power  has  the  right  to  intervene  in  matters 
of  faith  is  still  deeply  rooted  in  the  minds  of  many  of  our  jurists  and 
rulers.  Wherever  this  happens,  tradition  or  conservatism  is  the 
gainer.  For  law  is  in  its  very  essence  the  determination  of  precedent 
and  tradition. 

Tradition,  we  repeat,  wields  a  manifold  and  wide-spread  power, 
which  bears  no  relation  to  its  content,  and  which  is  felt  as  an  op- 
pressive tyranny,  even  where  the  content  of  the  tradition  is  good.  In 
this  latter  case  this  content  would  command  an  entirely  different 
kind  of  recognition  and  acceptance  if  the  evil  appearance  of  intellect- 
ual compulsion  did  not  rest  upon  it.  What  glorious  reading  and 
noble  lessons  we  may  find  in  the  evangelical  confessions  of  faith, 
if  we  read  them  for  edification,  as  the  preachment  of  the  Fathers  or  as 


428 

witnesses  of  a  past  spiritual  life !  But  how  unbearable  they  become 
as  soon  as  they  are  set  up  by  law  as  a  standard  to  control  the  under- 
standing of  faith  to-day! 

We  have  said  enough  of  tradition  as  a  burden.  It  is,  as  Hamack 
once  said  concerning  the  letter  of  the  emperor  to  Hollmann  (in 
the  Preussische  Jahrbucher  for  March,  1903),  "The  weight  and 
burden  of  a  long  history,  full  of  misunderstandings,  of  stiff  formulae, 
which  stare  us  in  the  face  like  swords,  of  blood  and  tears,  press 
heavily  upon  us  and  weigh  us  down;  but  in  it  a  sacred  inheritance 
is  also  contained  for  us." 


II. 

The  benefit  and  the  blessing  of  tradition  will  best  be  seen  by 
considering  its  educational  value,  its  social  value,  and  its  intrinsic 
value. 

1.  Its  educational  or  pedagogic  value.  We  have  spoken  of  the  tyr- 
annical sway  which  tradition  and  precedent  wield  over  the  growing, 
developing  human  being,  through  the  home,  the  school,  and  the  factors 
in  his  environment.  But  that  which  we  have  here  recognized  as  an 
inescapable  constraint  is,  nevertheless,  also  a  benefit  and  a  blessing. 
How  can  it  be  otherwise  ?  And  do  we  really  wish  to  have  it  other- 
wise ?  In  that  case  we  would  have  to  disapprove  of,  and  give  up,  all 
education  of  children  in  general. 

Wherein  lies  that  which  is  essential  to  all  education  ?  Simply  that 
we  do  our  part  to  give  our  children  what  we  already  have,  to  trans- 
mit our  intellectual  possessions  to  them.  This  kind  of  transmis- 
sion plays  the  principal  role  in  all  forms  of  education;  and,  the  more 
completely  such  education  can  hand  down  the  spiritual  and  ethical 
treasures  which  we  possess  to  those  that  come  after  us,  the  more 
highly  we  think  of  it.  Shall  every  man  that  comes  into  the  world 
make  an  entirely  new  beginning,  without  profiting  by  the  experiences 
and  achievements  of  those  who  have  lived  before  ?  What  superflu- 
ous labor  and  unnecessary  exertion  this  would  imply!  How  it 
would  hinder  all  progress  in  culture!  Look  back  as  far  as  we  may, 
let  thought  travel  backward  into  time  as  far  as  possible,  yet  we  will 
never  find  men  anywhere  compelled  to  make  such  an  entirely  new 
beginning  out  of  nothing,  as  it  were.     We  cannot  even  picture  to  our- 


429 

selves  in  imagination  the  protoplastic  mental  condition  of  beings  so 
entirely  dependent  upon  themselves  and  so  entirely  self-created.  On 
the  contrary,  when  we  reflect  upon  our  position  in  the  present,  and 
realize  how  completely  we,  with  all  our  burdens,  stand  upon  the 
shoulders  of  our  forbears,  we  are  filled  with  a  deep  and  heartfelt 
sense  of  gratitude.  "What  hast  thou  that  thou  didst  not  receive?" 
(i  Cor.  iv.  7.)  This  is  particularly  true  of  our  religious  posses- 
sions. 

Tradition,  and  the  act  of  passing  on  traditions  and  precedents, 
is  therefore  something  natural,  moral,  necessary,  and  beneficial. 
For  wherever  and  whenever  there  is  any  vital  religion,  just  because  it 
is  vital,  it  possesses  the  tendency  to  transmit  itself  from  one  genera- 
tion to  another.  One  of  the  natural  laws  of  the  spiritual  world  is  at 
work  here.  Even  the  atheist  bows  himself  beneath  this  law,  in  his 
desire  to  hand  on  his  atheism  to  those  who  come  after  him. 

Therefore,  the  means  which  the  Church  uses  for  the  transmission 
of  her  spiritual  treasures  to  others,  by  religious  instruction  and 
various  forms  of  divine  worship,  cannot  be  made  a  matter  of  reproach 
to  her.  A  vigorous  tradition  will  create  the  forms  necessary  to  itself. 
We  Protestants  value  instruction  as  the  simplest  and  surest  method 
of  transmitting  tradition.  It  has  indeed  been  said  that  religion 
cannot  be  taught;  and  it  is  perhaps  for  this  very  reason,  and  because 
this  is  true,  that  the  transmission  of  doctrine  so  easily  becomes  a  bur- 
densome task.  But,  if  doctrine  is  extant  in  a  church  or  plays  an 
important  role  in  a  religious  faith,  why  should  it  not  be  imparted 
to  others  ?  We  may  see  to  it  that  this  is  done  in  the  right  way,  and, 
if  this  is  not  the  case,  we  may  take  in  hand  the  work  of  improving 
existing  methods;  but  that  the  extant,  accepted,  and  recognized  doc- 
trine or  teaching  of  a  church  should  be  handed  down  to  the  follow- 
ing generation  is  a  matter  of  course,  and  its  transmission  is  a  benefit 
and  a  blessing. 

Custom  takes  the  child  into  its  lap  to  be  fostered  and  filled  with 
the  inherited  wisdom  of  the  past.  They  who  have  drunk  deeply  of 
this  stream  of  wisdom  in  their  youth  are  to  be  accounted  fortunate, 
especially  when  the  time  comes  when  they  must  go  forth  into  life  and 
be  thrown  back  upon  their  own  strength  and  resources. 

The  young  man  ripening  into  maturity  and  intellectual  self-de- 
pendence makes  a  twofold  use  of  this  inheritance  of  traditional  wis- 


43° 

dom.  One  part  he  grasps  more  and  more  firmly  and  holds  more  and 
more  securely.  He  appropriates  it  to  himself  and  earns  it  for  himself 
(according  to  the  saying,  "  Thou  must  earn  what  thou  hast  inherited 
from  thy  fathers,  before  thou  canst  possess  it").  The  other  part  he 
rejects,  either  laying  it  aside  gradually  and  imperceptibly  or  making 
a  sudden  and  violent  break  with  it.  In  either  case  tradition  has  been 
a  benefit  and  blessing  to  him.  Two  cases  are  typical  of  the  rela- 
tion of  sons  to  fathers, — the  son  who  in  his  simple,  homely,  friendly 
way  grows  up  into  and  adopts  the  customs  and  opinions  of  his 
father,  and  the  son  who,  through  constantly  increasing  friction, 
culminating  in  a  sharp  and  direct  contradiction,  works  his  way 
through  to  an  entirely  different  point  of  view  from  that  held  by  his 
father.  It  is  almost  impossible  to  say  in  advance  which  of  these 
two  is  most  indebted  to  his  father,  and  which  received  the  greater 
benefit  from  the  tradition  to  which  he  was  born. 

In  any  case  the  existence  of  the  individual  in  absolute  indepen- 
dence of  tradition  is  impossible.  We  are  like  men  standing  in  a  row 
and  passing  bucket  upon  bucket  along  the  line.  The  buckets  are 
filled  with  the  water  of  tradition,  and  whether  as  passive  or  active, 
good  or  bad,  zealous  or  slothful  members,  whether  we  are  being 
educated  or  are  educating  others,  we  all  find  our  place  in  this  long 
and  endless  succession. 

2.  Although  the  social  character  of  tradition  is  already  apparent 
from  what  has  been  said  concerning  education,  we  feel  constrained 
to  go  still  further  in  pointing  out  its  value  for  human  society. 

Societies  have  their  rules,  states  have  their  laws,  and  both  are 
supported,  held  together,  and  carried  safely  through  many  crises  by 
their  history.  Religious  communities,  such  as  have  been  called  into 
existence  by  the  great  historical  religions  and  confessions,  live  upon 
the  memories  which  are  cherished  in  common,  and  especially  the 
memory  of  their  origin.  It  is  true  that  all  piety  that  has  genuine 
value,  all  vital  religion,  is  a  life  in  the  present, — in  an  eternal  present 
or  a  present  eternity.  But,  the  more  religion  is  of  this  kind,  the  more 
it  would  be  dissipated  into  pure  individualism  and  subjectivity  if  it 
were  not  for  history,  memory  and  tradition.  It  is  possible  to  conceive 
of  religious  communities  without  traditions;  that  is,  in  the  moment 
of  their  origin.  Then  everything  is  comprised  and  compacted  into 
the  To-day,  into  the  enthusiasm  of  the  moment.     But  to-morrow  the 


43i 

present  has  already  become  past,  and  to-day  has  become  yesterday. 
To-morrow  the  faithful  will  already  live  upon  that  which  existed 
yesterday.  The  disciples  of  Jesus,  even  while  they  had  the  Master 
with  them,  were  not  entirely  without  such  a  yesterday:  each  one 
cherished  the  memory  of  his  call,  and  all  together  kept  green  the 
memory  of  their  meeting  together  and  their  common  store  of  recol- 
lections of  the  Master's  spoken  words,  of  every  act  of  his  that  they  had 
witnessed,  and  of  the  whole  of  that  strangely  altered  world  whose 
atmosphere  they  suddenly  breathed.  Even  Jesus  himself  was  never 
without  such  a  heritage,  which  he  had  received  from  the  past  and 
which  he  handed  on  further;  namely,  Moses  and  the  prophets. 

How  the  events  of  the  beginning  become  fixed  as  tradition,  and 
how  their  memory  is  cherished  and  perpetuated,  is  a  question  which 
it  is  impossible  to  answer  here.  It  happens  in  different  ways  in  the 
various  Christian  congregations  and  confessions.  But  in  all  of  them 
the  regulated  order  of  divine  worship  renders  a  great  service  in  this 
respect.  Even  that  which  is  incomprehensible  or  only  half  under- 
stood is  handed  on  from  generation  to  generation  as  a  common 
possession,  and  has  its  binding  effect,  such  as  the  Amen,  the  Halle- 
lujah, the  Kyrie,  and  the  formula,  "in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  sacraments — baptism 
and  the  holy  communion — are  instruments  of  tradition,  and  are 
especially  effective  means  of  fixing  the  minds  of  men  upon  the  recol- 
lection of  the  origin  of  the  community.  The  hymns  which  are  sung 
from  the  hymn-book,  the  sermon,  and — to  recognize  its  true  worth 
here  again — religious  instruction  of  every  grade  and  kind,  all  co- 
operate towards  the  same  end.  A  church  or  religious  community 
without  tradition  is  an  impossibility,  and  does  not  exist.  What 
has  greater  cohesive  power  and  holds  people  together  more  than  the 
festivals  of  the  Christian  year?  And  what  would  these  ecclesias- 
tical feasts  be  without  tradition?  It  would  be  well  also  to  think  of 
the  Bible  in  this  connection  as  the  common  possession  of  all  Chris- 
tians. 

Since  the  egotism  of  the  individual  continually  exposes  human 
society  to  the  danger  of  disintegration,  every  form  of  association  is  to 
be  welcomed,  and  therefore  also  the  religious;  and, since  such  associa- 
tion is  impossible  without  tradition,  it  follows  that  religious  tradition 
must  be  a  benefit  and  a  blessing.     It  supports  the  weak,  binds  the 


43  2 

recalcitrant,  and  attracts  the  young.  We  are  inclined  nowadays 
to  ascribe  everything  to  personality,  and  not  altogether  without  jus- 
tice. But  personalities  pass  away,  while  traditions  remain.  Per- 
sonality also  survives  in  the  tradition,  if  the  person  has  been  great 
enough.  This  leads  us  to  speak  of  the  third  way  in  which  tradition 
becomes  a  blessing. 

3.  Its  essential  value.  The  value  of  tradition  in  itself,  simply  on 
account  of  its  content,  entirely  apart  from  its  educational,  cohesive, 
or  any  other  incidental  effect. 

The  Catholic  Church  expressly  recognizes  tradition  as  the  source 
of  its  life  and  truth,  and  through  Vincent  of  Lerinum  she  has  set  up 
a  glorious  ideal  of  catholicity, — ■  'quod  semper,  quod  ubique,  quod  ab 
omnibus  creditum  est"  (that  which  has  been  believed  always,  every- 
where, and  by  all, — that  is  the  true  and  genuine  tradition).  Unfort- 
unately, the  difficulty  of  fixing  upon  anything  which  would  really 
and  fully  meet  this  criterion  is  too  great.  So  the  Catholic  Church 
leaves  the  decision  concerning  such  matters  to  an  infallible  author- 
ity, and  this  decision  the  faithful  Catholic  must  obediently  accept. 

The  churches  of  the  Reformation,  as  already  stated,  have  rejected 
tradition  as  the  source  of  saving  truth,  and  stand  entirely  upon 
scriptural  ground.  But  this  is  possible  only  because  the  Holy  Script- 
ures themselves  include  a  tradition  of  inexhaustible  fulness.  They 
could  well  renounce  the  danger  of  extra-Biblical  tradition,  because 
in  the  Bible  itself  the  religious  experience  of  the  past,  concentrated 
to  a  degree  as  in  no  other  literature,  was  handed  down.  In  it,  as 
nowhere  else,  they  found  the  word  of  God.  What  more  did  they 
need  ?  Everything  else  was  but  the  work  of  man,  which  could  only 
confuse  and  pervert.  And,  indeed,  the  religious  or  spiritual  power 
of  the  Bible  has  proved  itself  inexhaustible  until  this  day.  The 
preacher  who  preaches  to  his  congregation  all  his  life  out  of  the  Bible 
and  about  the  Bible  can  bear  witness  to  this,  as  well  as  the  simple 
layman  who  opens  its  pages  to  satisfy  the  immediate  needs  of  his 
heart.  In  the  midst  of  all  that  is  problematical,  strange,  and  un- 
certain, which  one  instinctively  lays  aside  or  cannot  help  criticising, 
there  wells  up  ever  anew  an  astonishing  fulness  of  that  which  is  per- 
manent and  vital,  and  which  proves  its  own  intrinsic  worth. 

Moreover,  there  is  nothing  that  stands  in  the  way  of  making  room 
for  the  extra-Biblical  tradition,  even  on  Protestant  grounds.     The 


433 

churches  of  the  Reformation  have  refused  (the  Reformed  Church 
even  more  decidedly  than  the  Lutheran  Church)  to  exalt  the  work 
or  words  of  the  Church  Fathers  to  the  rank  of  articles  of  faith ;  but, 
nevertheless,  they  have  been  glad  to  feel  themselves  one  in  historical 
continuity  with  the  mediaeval  church,  and  to  use  the  witnesses  for  this 
uninterrupted  historical  tradition  in  support  of  their  own  position. 
We  have  already  spoken  of  the  fact  that  the  theology  of  the  creeds  and 
confessions  rests  its  validity  on  the  Bible.  Suffice  it  to  say  that 
nothing  hinders  us  from  drawing  upon,  recognizing,  and  appreciating 
all  the  wealth  of  the  religious  tradition  of  our  own  ecclesiastical  past, 
and  all  the  wealth  of  religion  in  all  times,  in  a  way  which  we  have 
never  done  before,  and  thus  to  allow  the  power  of  this  tradition  to 
work  in  us  as  never  before.  And  this  may  be  done  in  such  a  way 
that  no  thought  or  event  may  be  taken  by  us  from  tradition  and  given 
a  place  in  our  own  life,  in  obedience  to  any  outward  compulsion,  but 
simply  because  we  feel  and  comprehend  its  value  for  us.  It  rejoices 
the  heart  to  hear  of  a  generation  that  has  self-confidence  and  believes 
itself  capable  of  doing  something,  and  whose  keen,  adventurous 
optimism  essays  to  create  something  new.  But  the  consciousness 
of  weakness  and  limitation  soon  comes.  Then  the  need  for  support 
and  supplementation  begins  to  make  itself  felt;  and  where  can  both 
these  be  better  found  than  with  our  fathers  ?  Are  we  ashamed  to 
learn  of  Goethe,  Schiller,  Lessing,  or  Herder?  Why  then  be  ashamed 
to  learn  of  Luther,  Augustine,  Paul,  Jeremiah,  or  Isaiah?  For 
Christian  piety  especially  a  return  to  the  sources  always  means  a 
wonderful  quickening:  just  as,  in  the  story,  the  giant  Antaeus  was 
strengthened  by  touching  his  mother  earth.  As  regards  this  Chris- 
tian piety,  it  has  been  demonstrated  again  and  again  that  Jesus 
Christ  abides  through  all  the  changes  of  time  as  the  real  source  of  its 
power.  Let  no  one  say  in  contradiction  that  we  must  look  forward 
and  not  backward;  that  religion,  like  all  other  spiritual  or  intellectual 
attainment  of  the  race,  can  only  progress  by  forward  development 
or  evolution.  What  a  confusion  of  ideas !  Most  assuredly  we  must 
move  forward.  History  does  not  walk  backward  in  crab  fashion. 
But  the  future  yawns  before  us  as  an  abysmal  void,  as  empty  space 
still  waiting  to  be  filled.  We  must  fill  this  void  with  our  own  bodies 
and  souls,  with  our  own  doing  or  not  doing,  our  hoping  and  willing; 
and  the  religion  which  has  no  ideal  aims  and  ends  with  which  to  peo- 


434 

pie  this  uninhabited  time-space  in  advance,  is  dead.  Nevertheless, 
even  while  she  strives  towards  the  future,  religion  can  live  only  upon 
the  past;  and  the  wealth,  as  well  as  the  persistence  of  its  power  and 
virtue,  depend  upon  the  content  of  the  tradition  which  it  brings  with 
it.  Therefore,  as  Christians,  we  will  always  continue  gratefully  to 
accept,  as  our  motto,  "Jesus  Christ,  the  same  yesterday  and  to-day 
and  forever"  (Heb.  xiii.  8). 

But,  if  we  must  look  to  the  past,  why  not  look  also  to  Buddha, 
Zoroaster,  and  Confucius? 

We  may  well  admit  that  Buddha,  Zoroaster,  and  Confucius  rep- 
resent the  most  valuable  traditions  for  the  Buddhists,  the  Parsees, 
and  the  Chinese,  respectively.  As  long  as  they  draw  upon  these 
original  sources  of  their  religion,  it  will  continue  to  live.  But  the 
attempt  to  elevate  Buddha  to  the  rank  of  a  real  prophet  for  us  is 
most  artificial.  Those  who  earnestly  desire  this  will  have  to  put 
superhuman  powers  into  the  attempt,  and  for  these  we  cannot  give 
them  credit.  For  us  also  Buddha  is  a  bit  of  world  history,  a  part  of 
humanity's  past;  but  he  does  not  possess  the  significance  of  a  tra- 
dition for  us.  No  historic  past  of  our  own  speaks  directly  to  us  in 
him  or  through  him. 

The  more  cultured  a  man  is  and  the  broader  his  intellectual 
horizon  becomes,  the  greater  his  ability  to  appropriate,  out  of  the 
spiritual  treasures  of  all  times  and  nations,  whatever  may  be  to  his 
own  profit.  The  masses  of  men  must  always  be  dependent  upon  one 
definite  tradition.  All  Christians  should  rejoice  in  the  tradition  to 
which  they  have  been  born,  and  gladly  recognize  its  advantages  and 
superiorities.  Herein  lies  the  strength  of  a  conservative  education. 
It  at  least  brings  tradition  close  to  the  minds  of  the  rising  generation. 
And,  despite  all  tyranny,  foreignness,  and  uncertainty,  this  is  no  com- 
mon blessing,  provided,  of  course,  that  this  tradition  has  a  content 
which  makes  it  worth  while. 

But  even  he  who  has  been  emancipated  and  become  intellectually 
free  will,  for  the  sake  of  this  content,  bathe  in  the  stream  of  tradition 
again  and  again, — henceforth,  more  than  ever,  in  order  that  under- 
standing, heart,  and  will  may  thus  be  renewed  and  strengthened. 
As  Goethe  says, — 

"Der  Strom  in  dem  ich  bade 
1st  Ueberlieferung,  ist  Gnade." 


435 


III. 


To  the  present  generation  tradition  is  both  a  burden  and  a  benefit 
a  bane  and  a  blessing.  There  arises  the  task  of  thrusting  aside  the 
burden  as  much  as  possible,  in  order  that  the  benefit  may  come  to 
its  full  expression  and  exercise  its  rightful  influence. 

i.  This  is  a  task  which  must  be  comprehended  and  solved  in 
practice  in  the  churches  and  religious  congregations.  The  despotism 
of  established  law,  by  means  of  which  tradition  exercises  its  harsh 
rule,  must  be  destroyed  wherever  it  comes  into  contact  with  the  real 
inner  and  tender  secret  of  religion;  namely,  personal  feeling  or  ex- 
perience or  personal  conviction.  True,  it  is  impossible  to  consider 
every  individual  demand  or  to  treat  with  tenderness  every  super- 
sensitive feeling.  In  every  sphere,  wherever  individuality  has  de- 
veloped, there  is  bound  to  be  a  tension  between  particular  needs  of 
the  individual  and  those  fixed  conditions  under  which  alone  com- 
munity life  is  possible.  A  tension  also  exists  at  the  same  time  be- 
tween the  time-spirit  which  desires  to  create  something  new,  that  it 
may  fill  the  void  of  the  future,  and  the  spirits  of  the  past  which  still 
live,  though  they  be  dead.  These  tensions  are  wholesome  and,  thank 
God,  cannot  be  entirely  done  away  with.  But  the  purely  beneficial 
effect  which  they  should  have  is  frequently  prevented  by  the  way  in 
which  the  jus  interferes  in  the  wrong  place.  Jus  (law  or  doctrine) 
is  always  the  codification  of  that  which  has  become  or  that  which 
has  been.  But  the  individual  desires  to  have  a  religion  which  is  a 
matter  of  present  experience.  He  has  no  objection  to  the  existence 
of  tradition  or  to  its  use  in  the  support  of  his  own  religion,  but 
desires  unconditional  freedom  in  his  use  of  it.  He  would  not  be 
disturbed  in  his  relations  to  God  by  any  legal  claims  or  requirements. 
Therefore,  as  far  as  the  state  is  concerned,  it  gradually  becomes  a 
matter  of  course  that,  as  Frederick  the  Great  said,  every  one  within 
its  borders  "may  be  saved  in  his  own  fashion."  But  the  various 
churches  and  religious  communities  will  be  compelled  more  and  more 
to  seek  the  forms  in  which  their  tradition  may  perpetuate  itself  without 
the  aid  of  legal  compulsion.  They  can  do  this,  provided  they  have 
an  honest  and  joyous  confidence  in  the  content  of  their  tradition. 
For  then  they  will  know  that  it  can  hold  its  own  by  virtue  of  the 


436 

spiritual  power  which  it  exercises  over  the  minds  of  men  through  its 
intrinsic  worth. 

Herein  lies  a  great  and  unmistakable  duty  for  the  evangelical  church 
law.  If  it  cannot  accomplish  this  task,  then  men  will  be  compelled 
to  throw  it  into  the  same  flames  with  which  Luther  burnt  the  canon 
law  of  the  pope. 

2.  In  the  second  place  there  arises  a  problem  for  theological  science. 
The  fundamental  relations  between  faith  and  history,  piety  and  tra- 
dation,  must  be  investigated  and  comprehended  in  entirely  different 
ways  than  heretofore.  For  one  hundred  and  fifty  years — ever  since 
Herder — it  has  been  the  vogue  to  discuss  this  problem.  Some  of  the 
best  and  finest  work  of  our  theologians  has  been  applied  to  it, 
especially  in  recent  times;  but  we  must  confess  that  hitherto  no  one 
has  found  a  satisfactory  solution.  Historical  investigation  sometimes 
speaks  as  if  it  could  draw  up  out  of  the  past  whatever  may  be  neces- 
sary to  faith ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  dogmatic  theology  often  speaks 
as  if  it  had  already  found  the  magic  spell  which  will  enable  faith  to 
remain  entirely  indifferent  to  all  the  discoveries  and  results  of  his- 
torical criticism.  If  revelation  were  simply  a  matter  of  ideas,  every- 
thing would  be  plain  and  simple  enough.  An  idea  effectuates  itself 
by  its  own  truth  and  perspicuity.  The  more  clearly  it  has  been 
thought  out,  the  more  it  towers  above  the  times  in  which  it  first  came 
to  light.  One  can  think  it  over  again  and  thereby  prove  it  and  pos- 
sess it.  But  in  the  great  religions,  between  which  our  choice  must 
be  to-day,  we  have  to  deal,  not  simply  with  ideas  or  opinions,  but  with 
facts.  They  have  a  history  and  an  historical  origin.  They  are 
history.  One  cannot  get  beyond  this  by  such  wisdom  as  that  of 
Lessing's  "Nathan  the  Wise."  (The  wisdom  which  Lessing  puts 
into  the  mouth  of  his  Nathan  is  usually  misunderstood,  to  boot.) 
Neither  can  we  give  fresh  currency  and  vitality  to  that  other  saying 
of  Lessing;  namely,  that  "accidental  historical  truths  can  never 
furnish  the  proof  of  necessary  truths  of  reason."  Necessary  truths 
of  reason,  such  as  Lessing  had  in  mind,  we  no  longer  recognize  in 
our  day  in  matters  of  faith  or  questions  of  religion.  Neither  do  we 
wish  nor  any  longer  try  to  prove  our  faith  by  accidental  historical 
truths,  in  the  sense  in  which  Lessing  uses  these  words;  and,  finally, 
historic  truths  are  not  as  accidental,  after  all,  as  Lessing  thought. 
Lessing,  who   has  so  often  helped   us  to  a   newer,  worthier,  and 


REV.  LEONHARD  RAGAZ,  D.D. 
Basel,  Switzerland 


PROF.  EDOUARD  MONTET,  D.D. 
Geneve,  Switzerland 


REV.  ERNEST  ROCHAT,  D.D. 

Geneve,  Switzerland 


REV.  G.  SCHOENHOLZER 
Zurich,  Switzerland 


HE 

tStT 


437 

truer  estimate  of  history,  so  that  he  deserves  a  great  deal  of  credit 
for  the  rise  and  development  of  the  new  understanding  of  history,  is 
still  mentally  involved,  with  his  declarations  concerning  necessary 
truths  of  reason,  etc.,  in  the  viewpoint  of  the  rationalism  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  which,  in  most  other  respects,  he  has  so  victori- 
ously transcended.  In  this  Herder  was  more  advanced.  To  him 
God  spake  through  history.  He  understood  better  than  Lessing 
that  religion  is  not  a  summary  of  doctrines  and  revelations,  does  not 
consist  in  the  impartation  of  doctrines,  but  rather  that  in  dealing  with 
religion  we  are  dealing  with  a  fact  which  can  be  made  the  subject 
of  contemplation  and  emotion.  History  itself  is  this  great  fact  of 
revelation.  She  consists  "of  seed-germs,  hidden  and  sowed  in  divers 
ways,  which  contained  much  that  could  only  be  developed  in  the 
course  of  time,  and  often  only  after  a  long  lapse  of  time."  She  also 
certainly  holds  in  her  bosom  religious  representations  and  ideas;  but, 
above  all,  she  awakens  emotions,  immediate  certainties,  and  springs 
of  action. 

Schleiermacher  also  travelled  this  road  of  the  historical  under- 
standing of  truth,  and  here  we  have  found  the  right  way.  Our 
reason  is  not  equal  to  the  task  of  freely  producing  a  religion,  even 
though  we  designate  it  by  the  title  of  the  "religious  reason."  We  have 
only  historical  religions.  These  are  capable  of  further  development. 
As  surely  as  they  have  history  behind  them,  they  also  have  a  history 
before  them.  If  we  try  to  construct  a  new  religion  out  of  "  necessary 
truths  of  reason,"  this  new  religion  will  resemble  the  old  as  much  as 
the  Homunculus  in  Goethe's  "Faust,"  manufactured  in  a  chemical 
retort,  resembled  a  real,  living  human  being.  No,  the  real  question 
is  simply  how  the  historical  past  is  connected  with  the  present,  with 
that  which  happens  and  lives  and  ought  to  be  in  our  present.  The 
question  is,  what  meaning,  worth,  and  effectiveness  the  fact  of  former 
times  may  have  on  the  generation  now  living?  of  how  much  real 
worth  are  the  traditions  cherished  by  the  congregation  or  religious 
community  for  the  transmission  and  handing  on  of  these  values  and 
forces?  to  what  degree  must  the  imagination  of  the  individual  co- 
operate, in  order  that  the  experience  of  former  generations  may  be 
reproduced  in  him  ?  For  the  old  orthodoxy  all  this  was  much  simpler. 
For  it  the  great  redemptive  acts — for  instance,  the  atoning  death  of 
Christ — were  events  which  had  significance  in  the  first  place  only 


438 

for  God.  God  changed  his  judgment  upon  sinners  on  account  of 
the  atoning  death  of  Christ,  and  for  the  same  reason  also  his  attitude 
towards  them.  And  through  the  operation  of  his  Holy  Spirit  God 
gives  to  every  one  who  opens  his  heart  to  him  the  benefit  of  the  fruits 
of  this  acceptable  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ.  This  gift  of  salvation 
or  bestowal  of  saving  grace  is  absolutely  a  thing  of  to-day,  a  present 
event.  The  agents  are  the  interceding  Christ  of  to-day  and  the 
Holy  Spirit,  equipped  and  armed  for  work  to-day.  The  Bible,  in 
so  far  as  it  is  taken  into  consideration  as  the  instrument  of  this  work, 
is  looked  upon  as  the  word  of  God  spoken  to-day,  timeless,  eternal. 
In  this  kind  of  orthodox  dogmatics  the  problem  of  how  to  make  the 
right  connection  between  that  which  has  been,  between  the  historic 
fact  and  the  present  need,  cannot  even  arise.  The  connecting  link 
is  God.  He  is  and  remains  the  real  subject  of  that  which  has  hap- 
pened in  history,  as  well  as  that  which  happens  to-day.  But  in  the 
very  moment  when  in  the  course  of  time  this  is  recognized  as  mundane, 
as  human  experience,  the  gravest  psychological  and  epistemological 
problems  arise.  It  is  no  reproach  to  theological  science  when  we 
say  that  she  is  still  at  work  upon  these  problems,  and  will  be  at  work 
upon  them  for  some  time  to  come.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  the 
subject-matter  and  the  idea  of  tradition  must  be  subjected  to  renewed 
investigation. 

We  will  not  close,  however,  with  this  interrogation,  but  rather 
with  a  positive  statement,  which  every  reader  can  easily  test  and  prove. 
It  reads: — 

There  are  two  ways  in  which  tradition  may  be  used  aright.  They 
are  the  way  of  criticism  and  the  way  of  faith. 

We  commonly  hear  these  two — criticism  and  faith — spoken  of 
as  irreconcilable  contradictions.  They  may  appear  to  be  disasso- 
ciated or  even  hostile,  but  that  is  simply  a  confusion  of  ideas,  or, 
oftener  still,  a  pure  delusion;  for,  in  reality,  these  two  belong  insep- 
arably together  in  the  use  of  tradition. 

Faith  is  confidence.  But  how  can  we  place  complete  confidence 
in  any  person  or  thing  without,  at  the  same  time,  withdrawing  the 
same  from  other  persons  and  things?  In  this  manifold  world  of 
contrasts  and  differences  it  cannot  be  otherwise. 

Criticism  is  judgment, — an  independent,  well-grounded  judgment, 
founded   upon    authentical   and   well-proven    principles   and   con- 


439 

scientious  labor.  Criticism  pushes  aside  much  that  is  doubtful  and 
untenable  in  order  to  penetrate  to  that  which  is  genuine,  fixed,  and 
permanent.  She  is  not  here  to  deny.  The  negations  are  simply 
the  chips  and  shavings  which  must  be  made  to  fly  in  order  that  the 
beams  and  rafters  of  the  new  structure  may  be  beautiful  and  strong. 
She  works  for  the  sake  of  the  affirmations  which  must  ultimately 
result  from  it  all. 

Thus  do  criticism  and  faith  fraternize.  The  one  cannot  exist 
without  the  other.  They  are  two  sides  of  the  same  thing,  the  two 
poles  of  one  and  the  same  transaction. 

It  can  easily  be  shown  that  the  much-reviled  historical  criticism 
cannot  exist  without  faith.  It  is  true  that  criticism  apparently  begins 
in  pure  negation.  To  doubt  is  her  first  duty.  She  mistrusts 
every  tradition.  "They  say  that  this  was  so  and  so.  Perhaps  it 
may  have  been  quite  otherwise."  She  seems  to  regard  nothing  as 
too  sacred  or  holy,  neither  the  form  (the  text,  the  letter)  nor  the  con- 
tent (history,  coherence,  meaning,  or  tendency).  To  the  uninitiated 
the  excess  of  critical  zeal  with  which  critical  science  sometimes  goes 
to  work  may  often  seem  barbarous  and  ridiculous.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  individual  investigator  may  be  guilty  of  mistakes  and  ex- 
aggerations in  many  cases,  but  they  are  quickly  corrected  by  his 
fellow-workers  and  fellow-students.  Science  is  continually  revising 
and  correcting  its  own  conclusions.  But  the  really  important  matter 
is  this:  the  critical  investigator,  even  by  the  use  and  application  of 
the  most  exact  methods,  can  never  arrive  at  any  positive  result  unless 
he  can  make  up  his  mind  to  believe.  In  the  last  resort  he  must 
believe,  he  must  place  confidence  and  trust  in  some  source  or  report 
or  supposition  or  commonly  accepted  theory;  in  short,  in  some 
positive  result.  If  he  cannot  do  this,  he  must  sink  into  absolute 
scepticism.  Such  a  scepticism  may  be  ever  so  clever  or  intellectually 
brilliant,  it  may  put  on  all  the  airs  of  erudition  and  masquerade 
under  the  cloak  and  name  of  science,  but  it  is  not  science.  If  the 
scholar  wishes  to  write  and  present  history,  or  if  he  wishes  to  reproduce 
and  describe  the  history  of  whole  periods,  and  finally  ends,  perhaps, 
with  the  purpose  of  treating  the  entire  history  of  the  human  race  as  a 
whole,  then  faith  or  belief  must  accompany  him  step  by  step,  in  order 
to  fit  him  for  his  work  and  enable  him  to  create.  He  must  have  faith 
in  that  which  has  been,  or  at  least  may  have  been. 


440 

On  the  other  hand,  even  the  uneducated  do  not  accept  the  traditions 
of  the  past  without  criticism.  The  Protestant  refuses  to  accept  the 
Catholic  view  of  history,  and  the  Catholic  rejects  the  version  of  that 
history  commonly  accepted  by  Protestants.  In  this  case,  where  the 
approved  methods  of  scientific  criticism  do  not  suffice  or  cannot  be 
accepted,  it  is  precisely  faith  itself  which  exercises  the  criticism. 
In  the  same  way  faith  and  criticism  walk  hand  in  hand  in  the  case 
of  the  patriot  who  rejoices  in  the  history  of  his  fatherland,  and  also 
in  the  case  of  the  Social  Democrat  who  studies  economic  evo- 
lution in  the  past,  according  to  the  scheme  of  Karl  Marx,  in 
order  to  acquire  hope  with  regard  to  what  the  future  shall  bring 
forth. 

Let  no  one  say  that,  if  we  approach  the  subject  in  this  way,  all 
historical  knowledge  will  resolve  itself  into  subjectivism  and  par- 
tisan stupidity.  This  danger  really  exists,  and  it  is  the  earnest  duty 
of  science  to  meet  it.  But  in  what  other  way  can  past  become  future, 
in  what  other  way  can  the  power  with  which  we  came  in  contact  in 
tradition  be  made  fruitful  for  our  doing,  hoping,  and  striving,  unless 
it  can  be  thus  subjectively  appropriated?  Those  profound  words, 
"The  just  shall  live  by  faith,"  also  apply  here. 

Let  faith  do  its  utmost,  its  highest  and  best,  that  criticism  may 
become  the  more  active  and  efficient.  For  often  faith  is  in  advance, 
and  criticism  must  laboriously  overtake  it;  and  then,  again,  criticism 
has  the  advantage,  and  faith  must  make  haste  to  keep  up  with  it. 
But  these  two  are  destined  to  keep  step  with  each  other,  and  neither 
one  will  ever  reach  the  goal  without  the  other. 

The  fact  that  criticism  is  stronger  than  faith  in  the  science  of  to-day 
does  not  prove  anything  against  faith.  For  the  science  of  to-day  is 
simply  more  criticism  than  faith,  as  she  knows  very  well  herself. 
But  knowledge  or  science  is  not  the  whole  of  life.  It  is  a  part  of 
life,  as  certainly  as  criticism  is  a  part  of  life.  But  life  itself  is  faith. 
We  live  by  faith  much  more  than  by  knowledge. 

And  if  one,  animated  by  religious  faith,  should  bring  to  life,  through 
the  power  of  his  mind,  by  his  desire  and  sympathy,  anything  that  once 
has  been,  so  that  it  lives  anew  in  beauty  and  energy,  nothing  can 
hinder  him.  Only  it  must  really  be  his  own  personal  act  and  pos- 
session. Criticism,  which  always  cries,  Halt!  in  the  presence  of  every 
reality,  must  then  treat  it  with  respect.     This  truth   furnishes  a 


441 

support  for  the  quiet  security  of  simple  faith  in  the  midst  of  the 
breakers  of  the  storm-tossed  sea  of  criticism. 

This  process  cannot  go  on  without  some  friction  and  tension.  But 
there  is  no  other  way  to  live.  We  live  by  inspiration  and  expiration. 
And  tradition  is  the  atmosphere  which  we  breathe.  That  moment 
of  time  which  we  call  the  present  is  too  short  and  too  poor  for  us  to 
live  thereby.  Happy  is  he  who  has  found  in  criticism  and  faith  the 
right  use  of  tradition.  What  more  does  he  need  for  the  equilibrium 
of  his  soul  ? 


442 


DEPARTMENT  OF  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION. 

Held  in  King's  Chapel,  Tuesday  afternoon,  September  24,  Rev. 
Franklin  C.  Southworth,  president  Meadville  Theological  School, 
presiding. 

Mr.  Southworth. — The  International  Council  is  an  institution  in 
which  men  gather  together  in  the  interest  of  religious  freedom,  from 
lands  widely  separated,  to  compare  notes  on  matters  of  common  in- 
terest. Its  purpose  has  been  to  talk  rather  than  to  act.  But  the  fact 
that  it  occurs  to  us  to  meet  together  as  a  band  of  preachers,  theolo- 
gians, educators,  thinkers,  and  workers,  who  are  seeking  to  unite  pure 
religion  and  perfect  liberty,  is  a  clear  indication  that  the  union  of 
these  two  is  not  yet  complete.  Now  the  American  type  of  mind  is 
essentially  practical.  When  it  discovers  a  new  idea,  it  does  not 
stand  off  at  a  distance  and  contemplate  or  admire  it.  It  seeks 
rather  to  harness  it  to  a  more  or  less  definite  task  and  set  it  to 
work.  That  is  why  we  have  here  in  America  such  a  variety  of 
religious  sects.  The  foreign  guests  who  come  to  our  shores  are 
apt  to  be  bewildered  by  this  multiplicity.  It  seems  to  them  to  be 
somewhat  of  an  indication  of  eccentricity  and  instability  of  char- 
acter, or  the  lack  of  ability  to  work  together  for  a  common  purpose. 
It  is,  however,  not  that  at  all.  It  is  rather  our  national  charac- 
teristic that,  when  we  find  a  good  thing,  we  like  to  have  our  neigh- 
bors share  it.  Americans  are  pre-eminently  endowed  with  the  mis- 
sionary spirit.  Moreover,  when  there  dawns  upon  the  mind  of  a 
philanthropic  American  a  new  religious  idea,  he  not  only  wants  his 
neighbor  to  share  it,  but  insists  that  his  children  shall  share  it, 
too.  Hence  our  growing  interest  in  religious  education.  For  that 
reason  there  have  been  founded  here  in  America  the  denominational 
school  and  the  denominational  college;  and,  if  our  friends  from 
across  the  Atlantic  look  upon  these  institutions  as  the  breeding- 
place  of  sectarianism  or  as  foes  to  progress,  they  make  a  serious 


443 

mistake,  for  these  institutions  have  been  a  most  important  instru- 
ment in  the  work  of  religious  education,  and  are  at  present  our 
chief  recruiting-station  for  the  Christian  ministry.  The  problem 
of  education  on  this  side  of  the  ocean  is  a  somewhat  serious  one  from 
the  fact  that  it  has  had  to  do  for  many  years  not  only  with  our  own 
children,  but  also  with  the  sons  and  daughters  of  Europeans,  who 
are  coming  to  our  shores  in  constantly  increasing  numbers.  Inas- 
much, then,  as  our  visiting  brethren  have  had  something  to  do  with 
forcing  this  problem  upon  us,  it  is  fair  to  call  upon  them  in  turn  for 
help  in  solving  it. 

It  seems  to  me,  furthermore,  that  the  time  has  come  in  the  history 
of  this  International  Council  when  we  may  address  ourselves  to  the 
question  whether  it  may  not  take  some  practical  step  in  inoculating 
the  youth  of  Christendom  with  the  cosmopolitan  spirit  in  religion 
for  which  the  Council  stands.  Two  years  ago,  when  we  conferred  in 
the  city  of  John  Calvin,  it  was  as  if  an  invigorating  breeze  from  the 
very  summit  of  Mont  Blanc  had  penetrated  the  recesses  of  the  halls 
in  which  we  met,  dispelling  the  mist  of  local  prejudice  and  the  dust 
of  insularity  and  provincialism  in  which  all  of  us  are  apt  more  or  less 
to  live,  and  giving  us  a  new  and  brighter  vision  of  the  snow-capped 
heights  of  tolerance  and  spiritual  sympathy  which  beckon  to  us  from 
afar.  Now  may  we  not  do  something  to  make  this  vision  perpetual 
and  to  impart  it  to  others  who  have  not  yet  seen  it?  I  suggest  that 
as  one  of  the  topics  for  discussion  at  this  meeting.  We  are  trying 
at  Meadville  to  make  a  little  contribution  to  the  solution  of  the  prob- 
lem. Through  the  generosity  of  a  Boston  woman  we  are  sending 
from  year  to  year,  on  the  Cruft  Travelling  Fellowship,  to  the  cen- 
tres of  theological  learning  of  Europe,  one  of  the  brightest  of  our 
graduates,  to  sit  at  the  feet  of  Pfieiderer  and  Rade,  even  as  we  have 
commissioned  students  in  the  past,  and  expect  to  commission  them 
again,  to  visit  Oxford  and  listen  to  the  voices  of  Carpenter  and  of 
Jacks.  But  it  is  a  poor  rule  that  will  not  work  both  ways.  We 
Americans  may  impose  a  pretty  stiff  tariff  on  certain  commodities  of 
commerce,  but  we  impose  none  as  yet  upon  students  of  theology,  and 
we  are  vain  enough  to  believe  that,  as  our  students  have  been  freed 
from  provincialism  by  study  in  Europe,  so  would  the  ends  of  this 
Council  be  promoted  if  students  from  Germany,  Switzerland,  and 
Hungary  would  come  to  us  for  a  residence  of  a  year  or  more  at  one 


444 

of  our  American  institutions  of  learning.  Let  your  young  men  from 
Europe  see  how  it  seems  to  get  out  from  under  the  shadow  of  an 
ecclesiastical  establishment  and  to  come  into  the  atmosphere  of  one 
of  our  expansive  American  institutions.  We  know  that  their  com- 
ing would  be  a  good  thing  for  us,  and  we  have  faith  to  believe  that 
it  would  not  be  bad  for  them. 

During  the  past  year  an  interesting  beginning  has  been  made  in  an 
international  exchange  of  pulpits  between  England  and  America, 
the  benefit  of  which  has  already  been  felt  far  beyond  the  limits  of 
the  parishes  directly  interested.  I  submit  that  an  interchange  of 
professors  among  our  schools  of  theology  ought  to  be  equally  possible 
and  would  be  equally  beneficial,  and  that  such  an  exchange  would 
make  for  international  comity  as  well  as  for  religious  fellowship. 

These  questions  may  be  considered,  however,  as  in  a  way  inciden- 
tal to  the  theme  to  which  we  are  to  give  our  immediate  attention. 
As  representatives  of  an  international  movement  in  the  direction  of 
religious  freedom,  I  have  to  invite  your  attention  to  the  representative 
of  an  association  which  has  done  more  than  all  other  associations  in 
America  combined  during  the  last  five  years,  in  behalf  of  religious 
education.  This  association  was  conceived  in  the  mind  of  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  educators  of  our  generation,  the  late  President 
Harper.  He  was  its  founder  and  for  some  time  its  directing  force, 
and  he  laid  the  foundations  so  deep  and  broad  that  it  has  grown 
stronger  rather  than  weaker  since  his  death.  The  executive  head 
of  that  association  is  with  us  to-day.  He  is  the  best  man  we  could 
think  of  to  invite  to  speak  to  us  on  the  Future  of  Religious  Education. 
I  have  the  ho  nor  to  introduce  to  you  Rev.  Henry  T.  Cope,  of  Chicago. 


445 


THE  FUTURE  OF  RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION. 

BY  HENRY  F.   COPE,  GENERAL    SECRETARY  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  EDUCA- 
TION ASSOCIATION,  CHICAGO. 

The  popular  extension  of  educational  privileges  has  in  these  last 
years  been  accompanied  by  the  development  and  elevation  of  educa- 
tion ideals.  Education  has  come  to  mean  the  training  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lives  of  all  into  harmony  and  fulness  of  living,  com- 
pleteness of  character,  and  perfection  of  service  as  individuals,  as 
children  of  one  great  family  and  one  great  Father. 

The  development  of  the  educational  ideal  has  been  accompanied 
by  the  development  of  the  religious  ideal;  it  has  become  both  practi- 
cal and  spiritual,  personal  and  universal,  free  and  bound  by  natural 
law.  Its  purpose  has  become  identical  with  that  of  education.  To 
the  realization  of  the  fulness  of  life,  personal  and  social,  it  brings 
the  dynamic  of  the  spiritual.  In  the  light  of  this  new  day,  religion 
and  education  are  evidently  inseparable;  religion  is  the  motive  and 
energy  of  the  largest  ideals  of  education;  education,  the  pathway 
to  the  highest  in  religion.  This  is  what  the  modern  movement  for 
religious  education  means.  And  it  therefore  seems  worth  while  to 
discuss:  first,  the  service  of  the  present  movement  for  religious  and 
moral  education;  second,  the  effect  of  this  movement  on  the  proc- 
esses of  religious  education  in  the  future;  third,  the  means  by 
which  the  promise  of  the  present  is  to  become  the  fact  of  the  future. 

I.  The  Service  of  the  Present  Movement  for  Moral  and 
Religious  Education. 

This  movement  is  manifest  in  a  deepening  discontent,  a  growth 
of  honest  inquiry,  and  an  eager  reception  of  new  principles  and 
plans.  The  movement  was  born  of  deep  convictions  fusing  into  a 
glowing  vision, — the  conviction  of  the  educators  that  general  educa- 


446 

tion  was  not  bearing  its  fruitage  in  character,  of  the  religious  leaders 
that  education  was,  at  least,  an  important  method  in  religion,  of  the 
scientists  who  demanded  the  recognition  of  the  reign  of  law,  the  ab- 
soluteness of  truth,  in  the  moral  and  the  spiritual  realms.  The  vision 
was  that  of  the  day  when  every  force  making  for  the  development 
of  life  shall  work  in  harmony  to  bring  men  to  the  fulness  of  their 
powers,  the  possession  of  all  their  heritage,  and  the  privilege  of  all 
their  service,  and  when  this  shall  be  the  common  and  supreme  aim 
of  all  those  who  serve  both  in  the  name  of  religion  and  in  the  name 
of  education,  and  when  the  methods  used  by  all  shall  be  those  which 
life  dictates  and  truth  discovers. 

The  first  definite  service  of  this  movement  was  in  finding  and 
defining  itself  so  that  it  passed  from  an  indefinite  dissatisfaction  in 
individual  minds,  accompanied  by  spasmodic  efforts  at  improve- 
ment, into  a  clearly  declared,  unified  expression  of  need  and  deter- 
mination for  reconstruction.  Perhaps  the  largest  service  which  the 
Religious  Education  Association  has  rendered  has  been  in  thus 
bringing  together  those  leaders  and  workers  in  ecclesiastical,  educa- 
tional, social,  and  cultural  institutions  who  were  meeting  their  prob- 
lems separately,  and  binding  them  together  in  one  comprehensive 
organization  for  fellowship,  interchange  of  thought  and  experience, 
mutual  co-operation  and  stimulus,  and  for  organized,  unified  ser- 
vice for,  and  inspiration  of,  all  the  agencies  of  religious  and  moral 
education.  Without  intending  to  suggest  that  the  whole  movement 
is  due  to  the  Religious  Education  Association,  it  may  be  acknowl- 
edged that  a  great  deal  already  has  been  done  by  that  organization, 
not  alone  in  definite,  concrete  things,  as  through  conventions,  con- 
ferences, publications,  exhibits,  etc.,  but  more  in  suggesting  im- 
provements, inspiring  and  aiding  the  workers  in  religious  education 
and  the  agencies  therefor.  The  result  has  been  the  stimulation  of 
public  opinion,  provocation  to  thought,  to  inquiry  and  examination, 
leading  to  dissatisfaction,  realization  of  need  and  square  facing  of 
the  problems  involved,  with  honest  endeavor  to  solve  them.  More 
careful  thought,  skilled  planning,  scientific  study,  and  elaborate 
experiments  have  been  given  to  this  problem,  more  helpful  schemes 
have  been  worked  out,  and  more  valuable  literature  produced  in  the 
last  four  years  than  in  the  preceding  forty.  The  examination  of 
any  bibliography  on  the  subject  will  establish  this  fact. 


447 

This  movement  is  resulting  already  in  giving  a  new  content  to  the 
word  "religion."  Hitherto  "religious  education"  has  meant,  to  the 
average  person,  instruction  in  Biblical  lore  or  in  theological  dogma.. 
He  was  religiously  educated  who  was  a  walking  warehouse  of  spirit- 
ual or  sectarian  information.  The  Sunday-school  was  regarded 
as  the  sole  agency  for  the  religious  education  of  the  laity,  the  theolog- 
ical school  as  the  sufficient  agency  for  the  religious  education  of  the 
clergy.  If  this  movement  meant  no  more  than  increasing  the  effi- 
ciency of  the  Sunday-school  as  a  miniature  theological  seminary  or 
even  making  more  alluring  and  thorough  the  curricula  of  the  semi- 
naries themselves,  its  interests  would  be  confined  to  a  small  group. 
It  regards  religion,  however,  as  a  matter  of  much  greater  breadth 
than  the  Sunday-school,  seminary,  and  pulpit.  Religious  educa- 
tion means  the  development  of  the  whole  life.  It  esteems  nothing 
that  makes  for  the  fulness  of  life  as  non-religious.  That  which 
makes  education  religious  is  not  the  nature  of  the  material  of  instruc- 
tion, but  the  aim  and  ideal  which  inspires  the  educator.  Conic 
sections  become  sacred  when  regarded  as  contributing  to  character; 
soteriology  becomes  not  only  secular,  but  sinful,  when  contributing 
only  to  sectarianism.  When  religious  education  comes  to  mean  the 
nurture  and  leading  of  a  life  into  its  fulness  under  the  inspiration  of 
those  ideals  which  have  proved  of  greatest  worth  in  character  deter- 
mination, then  men  come  to  think  of  religion  as,  subjectively,  inspi- 
rations and  ideals,  and,  objectively,  morals  and  ethics.  It  may  be 
that  one  of  the  most  valuable  contributions  made  by  this  movement 
will  be  the  relieving  of  the  word  "religion"  from  its  sectarian,  specu- 
lative, and  theological  odium  and  translating  it  into  terms  of  life  and 
character.  For  all  the  practical  purpose  of  every-day  life  religion 
and  ethics  will  be  regarded  as  synonymous,  and  the  plain  thinker, 
the  average  man,  will  use  the  word  "  religion "  with  the  connotation 
which  now  belongs  with  morals  and  practical  righteousness.  It  is 
bringing  the  phrase  out  of  philosophical  abstraction  into  living 
reality. 

Following  this  will  come  the  adjustment  of  religious  activities 
to  the  changed  emphasis  in  religion.  Once  begin  to  really  educate 
men  in  the  art  of  living,  the  change  in  emphasis  does  not  pause  at  in- 
dividual ethics:  it  passes  on  to  deal  with  society;  the  new  emphasis  in 
religion  becomes  socially  ethical.     As  soon  as  men  learn  to  live,  they 


448 

find  that  living  is  a  problem  never  individual,  always  social,  and,  in 
rough  terms,  religion  becomes  the  art  of  living  with  others.  Indi- 
viduals and  social  groups  trained  in  this  art  will  produce  institutions 
and  agencies  fitted  to  perform  their  social  services,  and  these  will  be 
religious  agencies  because  dominated  by  the  aim  of  social  character 
and  inspired  by  spiritual  ideals.  Religious  education  will  become 
therefore  socially  ethical. 

The  movement  must  create  new  standards  of  life.  It  should 
assert  again  the  dominance  of  the  ideal.  We  will  cease  to  measure 
men  as  great  or  small  by  their  incomes:  they  will  be  measured  by 
their  offerings  of  personality  to  society.  The  age  of  things  will  pass: 
the  age  of  men  and  thought  be  ours.  The  greatest  need  of  our  day 
is  religion,  that  sense  of  higher  values  that  in  every  age  has  made 
men  and  women  count  not  their  lives  dear  to  themselves,  that  inter- 
pretation of  all  life  in  the  light  of  the  infinite,  which,  after  all,  even 
in  our  day,  makes  a  sentence  from  Emerson  or  Jesus  mean  more 
than  a  check  signed  by  Morgan  and  causes  a  little  brick  house  in 
Portland,  Me.,  for  example,  to  be  worth  more  than  a  Montana  mill- 
ionaire's palace. 

Our  problems — strikes,  trusts,  graft,  divorce — are  the  errors  of  an 
age  that  has  not  learned  to  live.  Suppose  the  science  of  morals  had 
kept  pace  with  the  science  of  medicine  in  the  last  twenty-five  years, 
or  with  the  science  of  mechanical  engineering,  would  we  have  had 
in  all  the  splendor  of  our  material  prosperity  such  exhibitions  of 
spiritual  bankruptcy  as  we  have  seen  of  late?  In  vain  is  all  our 
mechanical  and  material,  our  practical  and  technical,  increment  unless 
to  bind  all  together  and  hold  all  steady  for  the  eternal  glory  of  man 
by  integrity,  honor,  and  high  spiritual  ideals.  With  all  ourgetting  we 
have  failed  to  get  wisdom.  It  is  the  getting  of  just  this  wisdom, 
seen  by  seers  of  all  the  ages,  for  which  religious  education  stands  in 
our  day:  it  is  the  wisdom  that  sees  life  in  all  its  relations,  that  seeks 
life  in  all  its  fulness,  that  will  solve  our  problems  when  by  its  light 
men  have  learned  to  live. 

The  movement  for  religious  education  should  bridge  the  chasm 
which  many  have  fearfully  anticipated  between  the  hold  of  the  moral 
obligations  of  the  old  theology  and  the  impetus  of  the  spiritual  ideals 
of  the  new.  There  was  a  time  when  the  fear  of  torment  tormented 
large  numbers  into  moral  conformity.    It  is  true  that  as  yet  the 


449 

higher  ideals  have  not  gripped  the  popular  conscience.  It  is  well 
that  compulsions  should  pass;  but  moral  impulses  must  take  their 
place.  Old  beliefs  have,  in  many  instances,  lost  their  power,  and  old 
leaders  their  prestige.  What  shall  fill  the  gap  ?  If  under  the  dom- 
inance of  that  which  we  now  regard  as  error  communities  were  kept 
respectable,  in  what  way  shall  they  now  obtain  those  impulses  which 
will  lead  them  to  righteousness?  We  recognize  that  the  possession 
of  the  most  complete  mental  cabinet  of  crystallized  and  catalogued 
theological  encyclopaedia  will  avail  nothing  to  hold  the  life  true  and 
clean,  apart  from  the  love  of  truth,  devotion  to  ideals,  and  fellowship 
with  divine  and  heavenly  souls.  It  is  the  business  of  religious  edu- 
cation to  lead  men  who  have  escaped  from  the  bondage  of  traditions 
and  ineffectual  laws  into  the  liberty  of  the  law  of  life,  into  living 
by  those  impulses,  aspirations,  and  powers  that  shall  redeem  society 
by  restoring  the  individual  to  all  that  he  has  lost  as  the  child  of  the 
Most  High. 

The  movement  for  religious  education  is  creating  new  bonds  of 
union  and  setting  up  new  alignments  among  the  scattered  forces 
seeking  these  ideals.  It  sets  up  a  standard  to  which  all  can  come. 
It  commits  religion  to  the  educational  and  scientific  method;  it 
brings  men  into  the  fellowship  of  truth;  it  sets  all  in  one  direction, 
facing  the  facts.  It  gives  to  all  this  high  spiritual  service  of  the  lead- 
ing of  our  fellows  to  fulness  of  life.  In  philosophy  and  practice  we 
may  differ,  but  in  this  we  are  wholly  at  one. 

There  are  already  signs  of  the  effect  of  this  movement  in  the  deep- 
ening and  broadening  of  the  popular  conception  of  general  educa- 
tion. It  moves  from  instruction  to  education,  from  the  utilitarian 
to  the  ideal  conceptions.  Character  becomes  the  aim  instead  of 
the  curriculum.  The  strongest  supporters  of  the  movement  are 
among  the  school  men  in  city  schools  and  universities.  Parents 
are  demanding  more  of  the  schools  than  recitations  and  examina- 
tions. Experiments  in  the  schools  as  social  centres  indicate  the 
trend  toward  a  larger  mission.  Church  and  school  and  social  forces 
come  closer  together  as  the  unity  of  their  aim  becomes  apparent. 
Leaders  in  higher  education  are  setting  the  individual  in  right  rela- 
tion to  the  institution. 

It  may  be  thought  that  all  this  is  but  a  dream.  It  is  not:  it  is 
a  vision,  a  rough  sketching  of  a  few  of  the  fruits  that  are  already 


45° 

seen  in  the  flower,  and  some  almost  in  perfection.  No  one  who  has 
attended  the  great  conventions  of  the  Religious  Education  Asso- 
ciation can  doubt  that  the  ideal,  cultural  forces  are  being  made 
manifest  in  a  new  personal  unity:  the  fellowship  and  liberty  of 
these  meetings  is  no  small  part  of  their  charm.  The  demand  for 
institutes  and  conferences  from  almost  every  State  in  the  Union 
the  general  unrest  and  wide-spread  search  for  better  ways;  the  steady 
stream  of  letters  of  inquiry  coming  into  the  office  of  the  Religious 
Education  Association,  asking  as  to  the  new  materials  and  new 
methods;  the  rapid  creation  of  a  new  literature,  particularly  in 
text-books  and  methods;  the  changes  taking  place  in  many  insti- 
tutions, some  of  them  of  the  most  conservative  type;  the  demand 
upon  the  Religious  Education  Association  for  more  help,  personally 
and  through  literature;  and  the  eagerness  with  which  its  materials, 
volumes,  journals,  and  gatherings  are  received, — are  among  the  things 
that  point  the  new  day. 

II.    The  Effect  of  this  Movement   on   the   Processes  of 
Religious  Education. 

If  we  regard  education  as  the  training  and  development  of  a  life, 
by  the  discovery  of  self,  by  adjustment  to  the  whole  of  environment, 
into  full  personality  and  service,  religious  and  moral  education  is 
the  inspiration  of  this  growing  life  with  those  ideals  which  have 
proved  of  greatest  worth,  and  the  training  of  this  life  to  the  expression 
of  those  ideals  in  personal  conduct  and  social  service. 

The  actual  processes  of  religious  education  will,  first,  be  scientific 
both  in  character  and  content.  Religious  education  cannot  differ 
essentially  from  any  other  department  or  type  of  education.  It 
deals  with  the  same  person,  with  the  whole  of  the  same  person,  for 
the  same  purposes,  and  upon  the  same  principles.  It  does  not 
seek  to  train  the  heart,  the  conscience,  or  the  soul,  as  something 
separate  from  the  rest  of  the  being.  The  faculty  psychology  has  gone 
to  the  attic.  Man  is  a  unit,  and,  therefore,  education  is  unitary. 
Whatever  we  may  be  ecclesiastically,  we  must  be  unitarians 
pedagogically.  Man  is  not  a  tenement  or  an  apartment  house, 
wherein  one  flat  may  be  depraved,  while  another  is  soundly  pious. 
Religious    education   will   therefore  be    unitary   within  itself  and 


451 

with  all  other  processes  of  education.  It  will  reach  the  whole  life; 
it  will  concern  itself  with  all  that  concerns  the  life;  its  reach  will 
take  in  the  playground  as  well  as  the  hymn-book,  and  the  doings 
of  the  gang  of  boys  in  the  make-believe  robbers'  den  with  at  least 
as  much  concern  as  it  once  bestowed  on  Daniel  and  the  lions'  den. 

Within  the  church  the  various  activities  will  be  co-ordinated  into 
a  progressive  scheme  of  education,  its  schools  and  meetings  pro- 
viding for  the  impression  through  formal  instruction  and  through 
worship,  its  activities  within  and  without  affording  opportunity 
for  expression  and  for  laboratory  work.  It  may  be  that  the  church 
will  receive  a  new  vocation:  she  will  not  be  regarded  as  a  tinker 
of  the  souls  of  men,  but  as  the  educator  of  men  and  the  constructor 
and  savior  of  society.  She  will  see  her  work  as  a  whole,  with  a 
new  coherency. 

The  work  of  religious  education  will  be  unified  through  all  its  agen- 
cies. First,  amongst  those  agencies  specially  for  its  purposes.  There 
will  come  a  standardization  of  the  curricula,  a  recognition  of  stand- 
ards in  methods.  There  is  no  reason  why  Sunday-school  grades 
should  not  be  as  uniform  as  public-school  grades;  there  is  no  reason 
why  standard  text-book  materials  should  not  be  produced  suitable 
to  all  schools  and  such  that  the  pupils  would  never  in  the  least  be 
ashamed  to  compare  with  the  books  used  at  public  schools.  Such 
material  is  now  being  produced.  There  is  no  reason  why  we  should 
not  find  definite  standards  for  courses  of  study  in  the  churches 
in  a  field  much  wider  than  that  of  the  Sunday-school.  As  the 
churches  become,  as  they  must,  the  spiritual  universities  of  the  com- 
munities, they  will  get  together  and  secure  unity  in  their  work. 
Absolute  uniformity  there  never  can  be,  especially  as  the  plans  of  in- 
struction are  subject  ever  to  the  purpose  of  inspiration. 

There  will  result  also  unity  with  every  other  educational  agency. 
For  example,  the  church  will  recognize  and  give  credit  for  the  re- 
ligious work  of  the  schools,  the  schools  will  recognize  and  give  credit 
for  the  educational  work  of  the  churches.  We  shall  see  in  the 
public  school  a  mighty  force  for  religious  education.  The  Bible 
will  not  be  taught  formally  in  the  schools,  but  the  spirit  of  religion 
will  more  and  more  permeate  them.  We  need  to  recognize  the 
religious  motive  of  the  public  school,  its  altruistic  purpose,  the  self- 
devotion  of  its  workers,  the  religious  values    of  its  disciplines,  its 


452 

power  in  the  determination  of  habits,  its  service  to  the  aesthetic 
nature,  and  its  important  function  in  training  human  beings  to  live 
together  in  society.  Economy  will  suggest  the  correlation  of  all 
the  educational  forces,  the  home,  playground,  library,  press,  club, 
fraternity,  business  college,  university,  and  school.  When  we 
begin  to  catch  the  breadth  of  education  and  fully  understand  in 
how  important  a  sense  it  is  all  deeply  religious,  then  we  shall  have 
taken  the  first  great  step  toward  inspiring  the  educational  leaders 
with  the  religious  ideal.  It  is  not  that  they  are  now  doing  an  irre- 
ligious or  an  unreligious  work,  and  need  to  make  it  religious:  they 
need  to  catch  the  vision  of  the  religious  significances  of  their  present 
service. 

The  result  of  such  a  co-ordination  of  these  agencies  will  be  the 
absolute  reign  of  the  educational  and  scientific  method.  It  will  not 
be  a  science  which  excludes  the  spiritual,  but  it  will  forever  exclude 
the  false  and  the  meretricious.  Religious  education  will  realize 
on  the  labors  of  the  servants  of  education.  The  experts  in  pedagogy 
and  the  specialists  in  psychology  have  already  entered  this  field, 
and  there  is  no  sign  of  greater  promise  than  the  new  literature  which 
they  are  creating.  There  is  a  scientific  seriousness  and  thorough- 
ness in  these  pieces  of  work  and  in  the  investigations  which  are  now 
under  way  that  is  full  of  promise. 

The  educational  spirit  will  mean  absolute  honesty  with  the 
materials  of  instruction.  Children  will  not  be  taught  that  which 
afterwards  they  must  endeavor  to  unlearn,  or  later  seem  to  be  com- 
pelled to  give  up  the  eternally  true  because  it  has  been  inextricably 
and  essentially  woven  with  that  which  is  now  seen  to  be  false.  The 
painful  struggle  we  have  known  against  our  own  prejudices,  the 
torture  we  have  endured  in  order  to  escape,  ragged  and  torn,  from 
the  prison  walls  built  by  our  early  instruction,  is  an  experience  our 
children  must  be  spared.  Religious  education  must  be  religious 
in  character;  that  is,  holy  because  absolutely  honest,  reverent  because 
reasonable,  faithful  because  fearlessly  facing  the  facts. 

It  will  be  no  mean  result  of  the  movement  for  religious  education 
that  the  normal  method  of  the  salvation  of  humanity  shall  again 
prevail,  when  from  first  awakening  of  life  there  shall  develop  the 
consciousness  of  one's  right  as  the  child  of  God,  when  the  nurture 
and  development  of  the  whole  life   into   fulness  of  character  shall 


453 

go  steadily  on  through  the  combined  and  harmonious  operations  of 
all  the  forces  that  touch  the  life  co-operating  with  the  powers  within, 
when  the  necessity  for  the  spasmodic  reform  and  revival  shall  have 
passed,  and  men  shall  think  of  religion  not  as  something  extraneous 
and  occasional,  but  as  essential,  all-inclusive,  infinite,  when  our 
children  shall  actually  and  continuously  receive  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord. 

It  will  be  no  small  gain  when  we  are  able  to  send  our  children  to 
Sunday-school  without  fear  that  they  will  be  led  away  from  divine 
and  eternal  beauties  or  be  twisted  and  dwarfed  in  mind  and  heart. 
The  formal  agency  of  the  church  for  the  religious  instruction  of  the 
young  must  be  organized  as  an  educational  institution.  It  will  have 
a  comprehensive,  unitary,  graded  course  of  study,  based  on  the  stu- 
dent's interests,  needs,  and  developments;  it  will  be  so  organized  as 
to  provide  for  the  regular  steady  advancement  of  the  pupil;  it  will 
provide  efficient,  adequately  trained  teachers,  suitable  material 
equipment,  and  every  facility  that  modern  educational  science  affords. 

Sometimes,  impatient  with  the  Sunday-school,  we  cry,  "Away 
with  it!  it  cumbers  the  ground."  But  the  new  type  of  school  is 
coming  into  being.  Its  organization  is  educationally  sound;  its 
work  is  co-ordinated  to  the  public  schools  and  college;  its  course 
is  not  theological;  it  is  homocentric  rather  than  biblio-centric ;  its 
purpose  is  not  the  production  of  Biblical  critics,  but  the  perfection 
of  character. 

Patience  but  for  a  few  years,  with  diligent  endeavor  to  help  every 
school  reach  such  ideals  and  with  painstaking  labor  to  provide  the 
right  materials  and  trained  leadership  for  them,  and  these  schools 
will  become,  under  the  combined  spiritual  and  educational  impulse, 
worthy  agencies. 

But,  before  these  things  can  come  to  pass,  certain  definite  things 
must  be  done.  The  church  must  train  a  teaching  ministry:  provision 
must  also  be  made  for  those  whose  work  will  be  exclusively  that  of 
religious  educators,  who  will  guide  all  the  nurtural  activities  of  a 
church  or  a  community.  A  new  type  of  man  is  coming  into  the  min- 
istry,— the  man  who  will  face  the  facts  and  adjust  himself  and  his 
work  to  them.  With  such  men  and  under  the  impact  of  this  move- 
ment the  churches  will  become  the  communal  expressions,  through 
definite  service,  of  religious  aspirations  and  ideals;  they  will  be  the 


454 

adequate  and  efficient  agencies  of  formal  religious  education  and  the 
power  inspiring  with  spiritual  ideals  all  the  educational  agencies 
of  the  community.  Three  things  such  churches  will  do:  give  in- 
struction in  religious  truth,  give  impression  of  religious  ideals,  afford 
opportunity  for  their  expression  in  personal  and  communal  service. 

III.    What  are  the  Means  by  which  these  Changes  are  to 
be  Effected? 

First,  by  agitation;  awakening  the  public  mind;  stirring  up  the 
conscience  of  our  people  to  a  sense  of  the  need  and  value  of  religious 
education.  It  is  good  to  have  our  most  cherished  institutions 
ridiculed,  if  the  process  leads  to  beneficial  reconstruction.  Our  peo- 
ple must  realize  the  grave  national  danger,  the  danger  indeed  to  the 
race,  if  we  continue  our  one-sided  methods  of  education,  training 
men  to  efficiency  in  making  a  living  and  neglecting  the  art  of  living. 
We  need  the  voice  of  prophets  in  popular  religious  education. 

Second,  by  education;  clear,  patient  teaching  of  just  what  relig- 
ious education  means;  educating  the  leaders,  teaching  the  present 
teachers,  slowly  giving  to  all  the  new  ideals,  leading  them  into  the 
liberty  of  the  truth,  converting  college  presidents  and  even  seminary 
professors,  training  the  new  type  of  minister  and  public  leader. 

Third,  by  assistance.  We  must  stimulate  the  best  men  and  women 
to  make  experiments,  work  out  plans,  conduct  definite  pieces  of  in- 
vestigation, and  produce  material.  We  must  make  that  which  has 
been  produced  available  to  all  workers,  be  ready  to  answer  all  in- 
quirers, and  aid  all  who  are  meeting  the  actual,  practical,  next-to- 
the-ground  problems.  The  cry  for  help,  for  materials,  instructions, 
and  directions,  stirs  one  to  the  depths.  Here,  on  one  hand,  are  the 
seekers  after  the  right  way,  and,  on  the  other,  those  who  have  direc- 
tion, assistance,  and  inspiration  for  them.  But  it  takes  money  to 
bring  them  together.  Money  is  needed  for  institutes,  for  the  print- 
ing of  literature,  for  bureaus  of  information  and  exhibits.  We  are 
obliged  to  refuse  to  help  simply  because  we  do  not  have  the  means. 
A  great  need  of  this  moment  is  money  to  set  men  to  work,  to  produce 
material,  and  to  make  the  material  already  produced  available  to  the 
leaders,  teachers,  ministers,  and  workers. 

Fourth,  by  promotion, — promoting  the  right  types  of  local  organ- 


455 

izations,  whether  of  churches,  in  groups  of  the  cultural  forces  of  the 
community  or  in  the  institutions  of  learning,  bringing  together  men 
and  women  with  the  newer  ideals,  forming  local  centres  of  religious 
education;  by  conventions,  institutes,  addresses,  and  correspond- 
ence, by  the  curriculum  of  literature,  by  every  means  within  our  pow- 
ers as  individuals  and  through  appropriate  organizations,  stimu- 
lating thought,  directing  endeavor,  determining  plans,  conducting 
experiments,  fostering  organizations,  leading  them  to  the  larger  vision, 
helping  them  to  build  in  the  unity  and  liberty  of  truth,  on  the  firm 
foundation  of  ascertained  fact,  the  glorious  fabric  of  faith. 

These  are  the  things  of  a  new  day:  we  must  be  willing  to  blaze  the 
way,  be  willing  to  work  often  with  inadequate  tools,  to  dwell  for  a 
while  in  rough-hewn  log  cabins.  Pioneer's  work  must  meet  frontier 
conditions.  The  all-important  thing  just  now  for  the  future  of  relig- 
ious education  is  not  that  we  may  have  immediately  the  most  modern 
machinery  and  conveniences,  but  that  we  shall  be  loyal  to  our  ideals, 
that  our  light  may  not  grow  dim,  that  we  may  not  be  "afraid  of  that 
which  is  high,"  nor  fear  to  tread  new  paths,  nor  fail  to  blaze  them 
boldly  and  make  them  plain  for  other  feet.  We  are  coming  to  a  large 
open  space,  a  clearing,  where  we  shall  find  that  others  have  been 
cutting  trails  to  the  same  place;  and  all  together  will  see  together. 
They  will  confess  that  education  without  religion  results  only  in  de- 
grading materialism,  that  religion  without  education  issues  only  in 
slavish  superstition,  and  all  shall  rejoice  to  see  the  religion  that  is 
in  education  and  the  education  of  men  in  religion. 


456 


SOME   REMARKS  UPON   THE   PSYCHOLOGY  OF 
CONVERSION. 

BY  REV.  P.  H.  HUGENHOLTZ,  JR.,  OF  AMSTERDAM,  HOLLAND. 

During  these  last  years  a  new  shoot  has  grown  on  the  tree  of  the 
comparative  science  of  religion.  To  you,  American  scholars,  theo- 
logians, and  psychologists,  we  are  indebted  for  the  initial  culture  of 
this  shoot.  By  such  scholars  as  Professors  Starbuck  and  James, 
Leuba  and  Pratt,  the  psychology  of  religion  has  been  introduced  into 
the  sphere  of  theological  science.  Thus  they  have  brought  about  a 
very  desirable  and  necessary  evolution  in  the  study  of  the  science  of 
religion.  Some  years  ago  religious  scientists  confined  themselves 
principally  to  the  history  of  religion,  to  the  ideas  and  notions,  the  forms 
and  ceremonies,  in  which  the  religious  sentiment  expressed  itself, 
but  the  sources  of  religious  faith  and  life  were  scarcely  explored. 
Now,  under  the  guidance  of  your  eminent  leaders  and  pioneers,  they 
try  more  and  more  to  obtain  access  to  these  sources  from  various 
directions.  Their  illustrious  example  has  been  followed  by  different 
European  scholars,  as  Emil  Koch  among  the  Germans,  Ribot  and 
Murisier  among  the  French,  Luigi  Valli  among  the  Italians,  Hoffding 
among  the  Danish  psychologists,  and  lately  a  Zeitschrift  jiir  Re- 
ligions psychology  appeared  in  Germany,  with  a  doctor  of  medicine 
and  a  Protestant  pastor  as  joint  editors. 

Two  different  methods  are  employed  in  order  to  reach  this  end, 
the  biographical  method  and  that  of  research.  Thus  Professor  James 
in  his  highly  interesting  book,  "Varieties  of  Religious  Experience," 
tried  to  penetrate  the  inner  life  of  great  historical  personalities,  such 
as  Saint  Paul  and  Francis  d'Assisi,  Saint  Teresa  and  George  Fox. 
So  Dr.  Starbuck  and  Dr.  Pratt  sent  their  interrogatories  about  re- 
ligious experiences  and  ideas  to  persons  of  different  ages,  sex,  and 
opinions.  Both  methods  have  their  advantages  and  their  draw- 
backs. The  biographical  method  recommends  itself  by  its  objec- 
tivity and  versatility.     The  biographies  of  eminent  religious  men 


457 

and  women  can  be  quietly  studied,  critically  explored,  and  com- 
pared with  one  another.  But  they  have  this  drawback,  that  the 
life  of  a  religious  hero  or  prophet  reflects  itself  in  the  mirror  of  the 
biographer,  who  beholds  it  from  his  particular  point  of  view  and 
through  his  own  spectacles,  so  that  some  biographies  teach  us 
more  about  the  mental  attitude  of  the  biographer  himself  than 
about  the  object  of  his  study.  How  totally  different,  for  instance, 
are  the  impressions  which  a  Froude  and  a  Norton  received  from 
the  lives  of  Thomas  Carlyle  and  Jane  Welsh! 

The  other  method  applies  directly  to  the  living  objects  of  research. 
Men  and  women,  especially  young  people,  are  examined  about  the 
awakening  and  the  development  of  their  religious  life.  But  here  the 
difficulty  occurs  that  religion  develops  itself  more  or  less  instinctively 
and  unconsciously,  so  that  it  is  very  difficult,  almost  impossible,  to 
many  a  man  to  give  account  even  to  himself  of  the  birth  of  his  re- 
ligious convictions.  Moreover,  many  people  do  not  easily  open  the 
gates  of  their  inner  sanctuary.  You  Americans  are  accustomed  to 
live  in  houses  of  glass.  You  are  interviewed  about  all  kinds  and 
conditions  of  sensations  and  opinions.  We  Europeans,  especially 
we  Dutchmen,  are  more  reticent  in  this  respect:  our  natures  are 
reserved,  and  it  requires  both  tact  and  deep  knowledge  of  humanity 
to  penetrate  into  our  inner  life.  Those  who  reveal  themselves  more 
easily  are  more  or  less  exceptional  natures.  And  so  the  pathological 
and  sensational  sides  of  religious  life  are  better  known  than  the  normal 
experiences.  The  religious  mind  that  waiteth  upon  God  is  often  shy 
and  timid.  You  have  to  penetrate  it  by  the  Rontgen  rays  of  silent 
observation  and  daily  intercourse.  A  syllabus  of  questions  enables 
you  to  observe  the  exterior  phenomena  of  religious  fife,  but  you  need 
a  great  intimacy  with  the  person  whose  soul  and  character  you  wish 
to  know  thoroughly.  In  order  to  understand  and  to  appreciate  fully 
the  answers  you  get,  you  need  a  profound  acquaintance  with  the 
character,  the  surroundings,  and  the  circumstances  of  the  object  of 
your  research. 

Nevertheless,  we  have  "to  row  with  the  oars  we  have."  And  so  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  biographical  and  the  experimental  method  must 
be  used  conjointly,  whenever  possible,  and  should  complete  each 
other.  Submitting  some  remarks  about  the  psychology  of  conversion 
to  your  kind  attention,  I  will  try  to  follow  this  twofold  way. 


458 

In  his  interesting  book  Professor  James  draws  a  distinction  between 
the  religion  of  healthy-mindedness  and  the  religion  of  the  sick  soul, 
quoting  these  words  of  Francis  W.  Newman :  "  God  has  two  families 
of  children  on  this  earth,  the  once  born  and  the  twice  born.  The 
once-born  see  God  not  as  a  strict  judge,  not  as  a  Glorious  Poten- 
tate, but  as  the  animating  Spirit  of  a  beautiful  harmonious  world, 
beneficent  and  kind,  merciful  as  well  as  pure.  The  twice-born  are 
vexed  by  the  anxieties  of  their  accusing  conscience  and  by  the 
temptations  of  the  devil:  they  walk  in  the  dead  of  night  till  sud- 
denly the  light  of  the  divine  grace  pierces  through  the  clouds." 

This  contrast  indeed  exists  to  a  certain  extent,  but  it  is  not  so  strong 
as  it  may  seem  superficially.  The  once-born,  too,  know  in  their  lives 
a  certain  period  of  deeper  communion  with  themselves,  of  a  certain 
awakening  of  conscious  religion,  while  the  apparently  sudden  con- 
version of  the  twice-born  has  been  prepared  gradually  and  silently. 
So  we  perfectly  agree  with  Starbuck's  conclusion:  "Conversion  is  in 
its  essence  a  normal  adolescent  phenomenon,  incidental  to  the 
passage  from  the  child's  small  converse  to  the  wider  intellectual  and 
spiritual  life  of  maturity."  So  the  deliverance  of  the  soul  from 
the  fetters  of  sensuality  and  egoism,  the  awakening  of  the  higher 
life,  can  be  compared  to  the  bursting  forth  of  the  beautiful  petals 
from  the  bonds  of  the  imprisoning  calyx.  Says  James,  "When  the 
new  centre  of  personal  energy  has  been  subconsciously  incubated 
so  long  as  to  be  just  ready  to  open,  'Hands  off!'  is  the  only  word 
for  us,  it  must  burst  forth  unaided." 

So  conversion  apparently  sudden  and  miraculous  can  be  explained 
from  the  subconscious  or  subliminal  life,  or  from  a  set  of  trans- 
marginal  memories  and  impressions  crossing  at  a  certain  moment 
the  threshold  of  conscious  life.  Saint  Paul,  for  instance,  was  con- 
verted, according  to  the  account  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  suddenly 
and  miraculously  by  Christ's  appearing  to  him  in  the  clouds  and 
saying  to  him:  "Saul,  Saul,  why  persecutest  thou  me?  It  is  hard 
for  thee  to  kick  against  the  pricks."  But,  psychologically,  this  won- 
derful vision  was  prepared  by  his  manifold  meetings  with  many 
Christians,  and  last,  not  least,  by  the  stoning  of  Stephen,  in  which  he 
was  concerned,  and  the  quiet  death  of  this  heroic  martyr.  The 
apparently  sudden  conversion  was  indeed  a  process  prepared  long 
time  before  in  his  inner  life.     The  impressions  which  he  had  got  on 


459 

several  occasions,  and  which  had  sunk  beneath  the  threshold  of  his 
subconscious  life,  crossed  it  at  the  moment  of  his  conversion. 

Therefore,  the  question  presents  itself  how  conversion,  either  sudden 
or  gradual,  has  been  silently  prepared  by  the  first  religious  impressions 
the  child  has  got. 

Here  the  well-known  theory  of  Hippolyte  Taine,  the  eminent  French 
philosopher,  presents  itself  to  mind.  According  to  his  idea  three 
factors  govern  the  literary  development  of  all  great  authors, — la  race, 
le  milieu,  le  moment  (the  race,  the  surroundings,  the  moment). 
Perhaps  the  ingenious  author  has  overestimated  the  influence  of 
these  three  agents,  but  at  all  events  they  have  a  great  influence  on  the 
religious  evolution  also.  In  the  first  place,  the  hereditary  influences. 
In  a  generation  in  which  religious  traditions  are  predominant,  the 
children,  as  a  rule,  will  be  under  their  influence.  To  how  many  ap- 
plies the  word  of  Saint  Paul  to  his  pupil  Timothy!  "I  call  to  remem- 
brance the  unfeigned  faith  that  is  in  thee,  which  dwelt  first  in  thy 
grandmother  Lois,  and  in  thy  mother  Eunice,  and,  I  am  persuaded, 
in  thee  also."  Augustine  never  would  have  become  so  eminent  a 
prince  among  the  Fathers  of  the  early  Church  if  his  pious  mother 
Monica  had  not  sown  in  his  heart  the  seeds  of  fervent  piety, 
which,  long  choked  by  sensual  passions,  yielded  at  length  their  fruits 
of  righteousness.  On  the  other  hand,  Luther  would  not  have  been 
vexed  during  his  whole  life  by  the  fear  of  God  and  the  devil  if  the 
narrow  Roman  Catholic  faith  of  his  parents  had  not  roused  that  fear 
in  his  mind. 

How  great  is  the  influence  of  the  surroundings,  the  milieu,  on  the 
childish  mind!  The  best  pupils  of  our  Sunday-schools  and  classes 
for  religious  instruction  come,  as  a  rule,  from  families  where  a  con- 
scious religion  purifies  and  warms  the  home  atmosphere.  How  many 
times,  on  the  other  hand,  in  my  long  pastoral  practice,  I  have  had  the 
sad  experience  of  finding  that  a  child  whose  home  offered  only  narrow 
and  absurd  religious  ideas,  later  on,  by  reaction  turned  his  back  on 
all  religion  and  changed  anxious  superstition  for  radical  unbelief ! 

The  moment,  lastly,  the  period  in  which  the  younger  generation 
grows  up,  has  a  mighty  influence  on  its  religious  life.  In  this  respect 
the  present  generation  is  in  an  unfavorable  condition.  We  older 
people  found  the  religious  truth  more  or  less  ready  prepared  for  us: 
the  faith  in  a  personal  God,  an  all-sufficient  Saviour,  a  personal 


460 

immortality,  was  imprinted  on  our  childish  mind.  From  the  be- 
lief imposed  by  authority  we  had  to  form  by  storm  and  stress  our 
personal  conviction,  but  at  all  events  the  foundations  of  our  faith 
were  already  laid.  Now  the  younger  generation  grows  up  amidst 
a  multi-colored  mixture  of  tendencies  and  opinions  rushing  in  on 
each  other.  Theosophy,  Christian  science,  spiritualism,  socialism, 
anarchism,  and  how  many  other  isms  crowd  in  upon  the  youthful 
minds,  exciting  the  imagination  by  their  sounding  catchwords  and 
causing  a  babel-like  confusion  in  many  brains.  The  simple  faith  in 
a  moral  order,  in  a  divine  will,  in  the  kingdom  of  God  coming  not 
with  observation,  offers  little  in  comparison  with  these  big  phrases. 
So  many  a  young  man  has  to  go  through  a  period  of  doubt  and  so- 
called  unbelief  before  attaining  peace  of  mind. 

I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  cannot  apply  to  Holland  what  Dr.  Pratt  in 
his  interesting  book,  "The  Psychology  of  Religious  Belief,"  testifies 
from  America:  "As  a  fact,  we  find  our  friends  and  neighbors,  of  all 
degrees  of  education  and  intellectual  ability,  almost  to  a  man  accept- 
ing God  as  one  of  the  best-recognized  realities  of  their  world  and 
as  simply  not  to  be  questioned."  On  the  contrary,  we  find  many  ag- 
nostic and  unbelieving  people  among  our  countrymen,  not  from  in- 
difference, as  a  rule,  but  from  sincere  and  honest  doubt. 

It  is  a  pity  to  observe  how  many  parents  unconsciously  prepare  this 
period  of  storm  and  stress  for  their  children  by  totally  ignoring  the 
need  for  religion  in  the  childish  mind.  Some  of  my  pupils  told  me 
that  they  got  the  first  impressions  of  God  and  religion  not  from  their 
father  or  mother,  but  from  a  nurse  or  a  maid-servant,  and  oftentimes 
such  a  person,  herself  knowing  only  an  angry  and  dreadful  God, 
awakened  in  the  childish  heart  only  fear  of  a  heavenly  tyrant.  Others 
fill  the  head  of  their  children  with  incomprehensible  Scriptural  pas- 
sages or  hymns,  and  compel  them  to  attend  Sunday  after  Sunday 
long  and  tedious  religious  services,  so  that  the  only  impression  of 
religion  they  get  in  their  youth  is  one  of  weariness  and  disgust.  By 
way  of  reaction  a  period  of  entire  unbelief  follows  very  early  in  the 
life  of  many  a  child. 

A  very  distinguished  and  religious  woman  told  me  that  in  her 
twelfth  year  she  professed  her  unbelief  in  God,  and  refused  to  repeat 
any  longer  the  daily  prayers  that  were  taught  her. 

So  a  boy  of  fourteen  confided  to  his  teacher:  "Every  fortnight  I 


461 

have  to  go  to  church  with  the  whole  family  in  procession.  There  I 
often  think,  'How  many  children  are  sitting  here  who  hate  it  as 
much  as  I  do ! ' "    One  must  needs  grow  bad  from  such  a  religiosity. 

I  myself  in  my  youth  was  so  crammed  with  Bible  lessons  and  re- 
ligious services  that,  having  become  a  student  at  Utrecht  University, 
for  a  whole  year  I  never  entered  any  church,  till  after  a  long  struggle 
religion  revived  in  a  higher  form  in  my  heart  and  became  the  light  of 
my  life. 

On  the  other  hand  there  are  children  who  already  rack  their  brains 
in  infancy  with  the  question  of  the  personality  of  God.  Two  little 
boys  of  four  and  six  held  this  conversation  in  bed: — 

Bob  (four  years):  "Tell  me,  John  [six  years],  do  you  know  how 
God  looks?" 

John:  "  God  does  not  look  at  all.     God  is  a  Spirit." 

Bob:  "What  is  a  spirit,  John?" 

John:  "That  I  don't  know,  either,  but  it  is  something  very  fine, 
much  finer  than  a  man;  for,  when  you  pinch  grandfather  in  his 
elbow,  you  feel  a  bone,  but,  if  you  pinch  God  in  his  elbow,  you 
don't  find  any  bone  at  all." 

The  gradual  awakening  and  growth  of  religious  impressions  is 
sketched  very  well  in  this  confession  of  a  young  man:  "I  was  a  very 
pious  child,  but  in  my  heart  I  felt  a  certain  fear  of  God.  When  I 
heard  you  say  that  Jesus  called  God  'Father,'  it  made  little  im- 
pression on  me;  but  I  liked  to  hear  the  history  of  Jesus  very  much. 
My  fear  disappeared,  of  course,  as  I  grew  up,  already  before  my 
twelfth  year,  I  suppose.  Doubts  troubled  me  sometimes,  but  posi- 
tively unbelieving  I  have  never  been.  In  my  secluded  life  here  [as 
an  engineer  in  a  far  country]  I  have  felt  grow  up  into  adoration  and 
unutterable  love  the  great  emotion  which  I  felt  as  a  boy  when  I 
heard  you  and  other  serious  people  pronounce  the  powerful  word, 
God." 

From  these  observations  follows  the  conclusion  that  a  gradual 
transition  from  lower  to  higher  life,  from  a  selfish  and  sensual  exist- 
ence to  a  life  of  abnegation  and  self-denial,  cannot  be  too  early 
promoted  by  education.  Therefore,  religious  habits  in  the  family 
can  be  of  high  value.  Misused  and  awkwardly  applied  custom  can 
hinder  the  growth  of  spiritual  life.  Daily  prayers  and  Bible  lessons, 
mechanically  and  slavishly  repeated,  are  wearisome  to  many  a  childish 


462 

soul.     They  may  be  the  cause  of  a  misunderstanding  and  dislike 
for  religion  in  later  life. 

In  many  a  childish  mind  an  inundation  of  Bible  texts  and  hymns 
washes  away  the  germs  of  natural  piety.  I  know  several  young  men 
who  call  themselves  infidel  as  a  reaction  from  the  surfeit  of  dogmatic 
religion  they  received  in  youth.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  custom, 
intelligently  and  cautiously  followed,  can  be  the  channel  through 
which  the  stream  of  religious  life  flows.  The  first  impressions  and 
habits  are  decisive  for  later  life.  "The  child  is  father  to  the  man," 
says  Wordsworth.  Has  not  the  well-known  word  of  Horatius  the 
same  meaning  ? 

"  Quo  semel  est  imbuta  recens  servabit  odorem  testa  diu." 

"  The  dish  will  long  keep  the  smell  of  the  food  with  which  it  once 
was  imbued." 

So  a  childish  prayer,  not  formally  imposed,  but  uttered  sponta- 
neously, can  be  the  first  expression  of  religious  desire.  Therefore,  it 
should  not  be  limited  to  physical  wants  in  the  first  place.  Grace 
before  and  after  meals,  as  a  rule,  is  a  mere  form  and  a  worthless 
ceremony. 

It  often  happens  in  a  family  where  grace  before  and  after  meals  is 
a  mere  ceremony  that  some  one  asks,  **  Have  we  said  grace  already  ?  " 
"  Yes,  we  have,"  says  another  one.     "  Oh,  I  did  not  know." 

A  sharp  boy,  dining  with  a  family  as  a  guest,  had  to  say  grace  after 
dinner,  during  which  no  drink  had  been  offered  to  him.  "Heavenly 
Father,"  he  said,  "I  thank  you  for  the  dinner.  Drink  I  did  not 
get.     Amen,"  giving  in  this  manner  a  gentle  hint  to  his  hosts. 

Prayers  should  be  connected  rather  with  moral  needs  and  spiritual 
desires.  When  the  child  goes  to  bed  with  the  knowledge  of  having 
been  naughty  and  having  caused  sorrow  to  its  parents,  it  is  the  right 
moment  for  putting  into  its  mouth  a  prayer  for  pardon  annd  strength 
to  be  good. 

Nature,  as  a  rule,  makes  little  impression  -on  the  childish  mind. 
There  are  exceptions,  it  is  true.  Some  of  my  pupils  told  me  that  at 
the  age  of  about  eight  years  they  looked  up  to  the  starry  sky  with  the 
idea,  "Beyond  these  stars  God  is  sitting  on  his  throne,"  or  that  a 
beautiful  landscape  suggested  the  question,  "Who  has  made  this 
wonderful  world?"    Usually,  however,  the  cosmological  argument 


463 

does  not  occur  to  the  childish  mind.  But  the  sense  of  shame  and 
repentance,  of  guilt  and  contrition,  may  awake  early  in  the  childish 
heart  the  dawn  of  a  sound  conversion. 

Moreover,  the  teacher  of  religion  should  impose  on  his  pupils  no 
system  of  dogmatic  rules,  sharply  denned  and  immovably  fixed, — 
stones  for  bread,  indeed ! — but  simple  principles  and  religious  beliefs 
forming  the  foundation  of  the  building  which  the  growing  man  has  to 
raise  in  himself.  A  deep  respect  for  the  voice  of  conscience,  for  the 
categorical  imperative,  Du  sollst  (You  ought),  must  be  the  basis  of 
that  spiritual  temple  which  gradually  arises  in  every  religious  mind. 

If  these  first  moral  principles  are  supported  by  the  moral  authority 
and  the  spiritual  superiority  of  the  teacher,  they  will  exercise  a 
mighty  influence  on  the  childish  mind.  Not  what,  but  how,  you 
teach  is  the  great  question.  Every  teacher  who  speaks  with  real 
conviction  and  warm  enthusiasm,  "  quern  pectus  dissertum  facit " 
(whom  the  heart  makes  eloquent),  will  conquer  the  heart  of  his 
pupils,  especially  when  his  instruction  concerns  the  highest  life  of 
the  soul. 

For  the  rest  the  religious  development  of  young  people  must  be 
governed  by  the  principle,  "diversity  of  gifts,  but  the  same  spirit," 
— one  spirit  of  holy  earnestness  and  profound  piety,  one  thirst  after 
truth  and  righteousness,  but  at  the  same  time  the  utmost  liberty  and 
the  deepest  respect  for  individuality.  There  is  not  one  way,  but  many 
ways,  to  the  heaven  of  celestial  peace  and  blessedness.  You  can 
reach  God  by  the  intellectual,  the  mystical,  the  ethical,  the  practical 
road,  each  following  his  own  path.  The  heavenly  Father  has  many 
sorts  and  conditions  of  children,  and  each  needs  to  be  educated 
according  to  his  personal  talents  and  temperament.  You  cannot 
desire,  says  Lessing  in  his  "Nathan  der  Weise,"  "  dass  alien 
Baumen  eine  Rinde  wachse  "  (that  all  trees  should  grow  the  same 
bark). 

So  the  once  and  the  twice  born,  the  mystical  and  the  intellectual, 
the  theoretical  and  the  practical  nature,  each  in  his  own  way  comes 
to  God,  the  everlasting  and  ever-flowing  source  of  spiritual  life  and 
love. 


464 


DEPARTMENT  OF  PRESS  AND  PUBLICATION. 

Held  at  the  Unitarian  Building,  Wednesday  afternoon,  September 

25- 

This  conference  of  the  editors  and  publishers  of  liberal  religious 
papers  and  periodicals  was  one  of  the  smallest  meetings  of  the  week, 
but  was  of  interest  and  value  to  those  who  took  part  in  it.  Rev. 
Frederick  A.  Bisbee,  D.D.,  editor  of  the  Universalist  Leader,  pre- 
sided, and  spoke  as  follows: — 

REMARKS  OF  REV.  F.  A.  BISBEE,  D.D. 

In  this,  one  of  the  smallest  departments  of  this  great  Congress, 
I  invite  you  to  the  consideration  of  a  theme  of  largest  importance. 

The  secret  of  commercial  success  lies  very  largely  in  the  manner 
of  putting  the  goods  upon  the  market.  However  great  the  merit  of 
a  commodity,  invention,  or  idea,  it  comes  to  its  own  only  when  it 
reaches  the  people  whose  need  it  is  designed  to  supply.  Production 
becomes  potent  through  wise  distribution.  The  mediator  is  essential 
to  both  God  and  man.  I  rank  the  religious  journal  chief  among  the 
instrumentalities  for  the  spread  of  religious  truth  and  inspiration, 
and,  amid  present  conditions,  vital  to  any  religious  propaganda. 

In  this  country  we  have,  approximately,  900  religious  periodicals, 
reaching  about  5,000,000  subscribers,  and,  according  to  the  newspaper 
standard,  read  by  20,000,000  people.  My  impression  is  that  during 
the  last  quarter  of  a  century  the  number  of  journals  has  slightly 
increased  and  the  number  of  subscribers  considerably  decreased. 

During  the  last  half-century  there  have  been  marked  changes  in  the 
character  of  these  periodicals.  Once  they  were  religious  with  a 
miscellaneous  annex:  now  they  are  mostly  miscellaneous  with  a 
religious  annex.  With  the  multiplying  and  cheapening  of  papers 
and  magazines  appealing  to  every  department  of  human  life  the 


465 

religious  journal  has  been  driven  to  various  expedients  to  preserve 
its  very  existence,  and  in  some  cases  committed  unintentional 
suicide  by  abandoning  its  own  familiar  and  chosen  field  of  service  in 
its  search  for  material  success,  or  secured  the  material  success  only 
through  the  crucifixion  of  its  religious  purpose. 

It  is  not  necessary  in  this  presence  to  argue  the  importance  of  the 
religious  journal.  We  all  know  it,  and,  knowing  it,  look  with  keen 
anxiety  upon  what  seems  an  impending  eclipse.  We  naturally  face 
reluctantly  so  gloomy  an  outlook.  And  yet  why  should  present  con- 
ditions shake  our  confidence  or  daunt  our  courage  ?  If  we  are  deal- 
ing with  the  things  of  eternity,  only  the  verdict  of  eternity  can  in- 
fluence us. 

Yet  I  acknowledge  that  we  face  some  very  serious  problems,  though 
I  am  not  at  all  pessimistic  regarding  the  ultimate  outcome,  providing 
we  endure  to  the  end  with  singleness  of  aim.  And  I  am  disposed  to 
look  these  facts  fairly  in  the  face  with  you  to-day. 

The  religious  journal  is  losing  ground.  There  are  not  half  a 
dozen  self-supporting  religious  papers  in  America  to-day,  and  not 
one  making  money.  What  are  the  reasons,  and  what  are  the  reme- 
dies? 

I  am  going  to  suggest  one  reason  as  primary  to  all  others,  and  con- 
taining a  potential  remedy.  I  do  not  believe  you  will  all  agree  with 
me,  but  the  conviction  is  upon  me  and  strengthens  with  observation 
and  experience. 

The  religious  journal  is  the  composite  pastor  of  a  conglomerate 
parish.  Its  problems  are  but  the  problems  of  the  local  pastor  mul- 
tiplied and  made  more  intricate.  The  editor  preaches  to  an  unseen 
and  unresponsive  congregation,  and  does  pastoral  work  by  proxy. 
The  practical  policy  of  the  religious  press  does  not  differ  from  that 
of  the  modern  pulpit  in  cultivating  a  diversity  of  interests  to  such  an 
extent  as  to  defeat  any  specific  purpose.  I  am  not  in  the  critic's 
chair,  but  in  the  confessional.  I  only  note  the  facts  to  which  we  have 
all  been  driven  seemingly,  however  unwillingly, — the  fact  that  we 
have  pushed  the  distinctly  religious  interests,  to  foster  which  we  are 
called  into  being,  farther  and  farther  back  in  our  papers  to  make 
room  for  the  so-called  "  live  topics  "  of  secular  life,  devoting  our  con- 
spicuous columns  to  the  same  class  of  editorial  work  we  find  in  the 
secular  press,  until  we  have  destroyed  the  very  reason  for  our  own 


466 

existence.  The  primary  purpose  of  the  religious  journal  is  to  foster 
religion:  all  else  must  be  merely  incidental.  In  proportion  as  it  de- 
parts from  this  purpose  does  it  cease  to  have  reason  for  being.  When 
we  suffer  or  encourage  the  crowding  of  the  specifically  religious  into 
the  obscurity  of  small  type  and  narrow  columns  to  make  room  for 
the  superficially  "interesting,"  we  are  not  only  disloyal  to  our  holy 
purpose,  but,  I  firmly  believe,  are  committing  slow  but  certain  suicide. 

People  will  value  our  words  and  work  no  higher  than  we  do  our- 
selves, and,  if  we  thrust  religion  into  a  secondary  place,  we  must 
expect  them  to  do  the  same.  Why  should  any  man  subscribe  for  a 
religious  journal  which  is  but  a  poor  imitation  of  a  secular  paper 
costing  only  half  as  much  ?  How  can  any  man  be  expected  to  sustain 
a  religious  paper  which  is  not  religious?  And  this  is  my  contention: 
that  religious  journals  have  failed  because  they  have  ceased  to  be 
religious,  and  run  after  all  sorts  of  idols  and  passing  fads  and  fancies, 
and  mixed  into  business  of  every  other  interest  instead  of  minding 
their  own  and  magnifying  it  until  none  should  pass  it  by.  I  would 
contend  for  the  primacy  of  religion  among  life's  interests;  that  relig- 
ion shall  have  its  rightful  place  and  true  valuation;  that  religion  is 
not  an  annex  or  a  product  of  some  other  life-quality,  but  a  vital 
entity,  independent  and  in  the  end  sovereign,  to  which  every  life  in 
the  ultimate  test  of  experience  acknowledges  allegiance. 

I  was  impressed  with  the  statement  of  Dr.  Eliot,  in  his  opening 
address  as  President  of  this  Congress,  that  "we  should  not  makewwreal 
distinctions  between  the  sacred  and  the  secular,"  but  there  is  a  real 
distinction  which  we  cannot  afford  to  ignore,  and  which  Dr.  Gordon 
emphasized  when  from  the  same  platform  he  insisted  that  "  religion 
is  an  independent  and  momentous  fact," — a  fact  which  stands  in 
relation  to  all  other  facts  of  life,  but  to-day  we  are  magnifying  the 
"relations"  and  obscuring  the  fact.  There  is  a  world-full  of  good 
things  and  worthy  objects  well  deserving  attention,  but  regal  among 
them  all  stands  religion,  but  because  we  have  despoiled  her  of  her 
crown  we  ourselves  are  fallen. 

With  this  but  passing  suggestion  of  primary  reason  and  remedy, 
I  turn  to  some  practical  considerations  of  immediate  interest,  which 
I  shall  little  more  than  catalogue,  leaving  them  for  discussion. 

The  age  is  indifferent  to  organic  religion,  one  of  the  fruits  of  what 
I  have  already  pointed  out.     The  age  is  not  irreligious,  but,  where 


467 

it  once  received  its  supply  from  the  single  source  of  the  pulpit,  relig- 
ion now  flows  in  through  many  channels.  Every  newspaper  of 
note  has  its  religious  department,  and  religion  is  more  frequently 
than  ever  the  dominating  note  of  literature,  but  organized  religion 
must  now  appeal  where  once  it  commanded. 

It  is  an  amusement-loving  age;  it  has  gone  pleasure-mad  in  spots. 
The  satiated  tastes  must  have  piquant  sauces. 

It  is  a  hurrying  age,  and  forces  growth.  It  cannot  wait  for  the  old 
man  to  die,  but  wants  its  inheritance  now  to  spend  in  riotous  living. 
It  wants  to  get  rich  quick,  to  get  healthy  quick,  to  get  education 
quick.  It  is  immediate,  and  cares  not  for  the  future.  It  solves  all 
its  problems  with  fads. 

What  is  the  religious  journal  to  be  and  to  do  in  such  an  age  ?  It 
must  adjust  itself,  but  without  sacrificing*  its  ultimate  purpose. 

The  fact  is  we  have  come  into  a  time  when  the  religious  journal 
does  not,  perhaps  cannot,  receive  its  normal  support  from  the  indi- 
vidual, and  yet  never  was  there  a  time  when  its  ministry  was  more 
needed  or  could  be  made  more  efficient.  Never  was  there  a  time 
when  the  Church  had  such  need  of  its  service,  for,  instead  of  people 
coming  to  the  church,  the  church  must  go  after  the  people,  and  its 
best  messenger  is  the  church  paper:  that  never  tires  and  never  fails, 
but  every  week  goes  into  the  home  as  a  reminder  of  church  obliga- 
tions; and  it  appears  to  me  that  under  present  conditions  the  wisest 
thing  any  church  can  do  is  to  subsidize  in  some  way  this  most  effi- 
cient missionary.  And,  speaking  from  my  own  experience,  I  can  see 
how  all  the  problems  of  my  own  paper  could  be  solved  in  a  day  if 
every  one  of  our  churches  were  to  subscribe  for  a  certain  number  of 
copies,  to  be  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  minister,  to  be  sent  where 
they  were  most  needed.  This  would  insure  a  better  paper,  and  in 
return  revive  the  interest  in  the  local  church  and  the  general  cause. 

Another  dream  I  have  had,  but  which  may  never  be  realized, 
is  that  in  the  great  centres,  where  there  are  a  number  of  religious 
papers  published,  we  might  some  time  learn  a  little  wisdom  of  the 
world,  and  do  away  with  all  of  our  little  mechanical  plants,  where 
we  work  under  such  limitations,  and  combine  in  an  establishment 
which  would  do  our  work  better  and  cheaper. 

But,  brethren  of  the  pen,  there  is  no  chief  among  us  to-day;  no 
one  may  furnish  all  the  copy.     We  are  here  for  mutual  conference 


468 

and  help,  here  to  face  our  problems  frankly  and  courageously  in 
the  confidence  of  a  fellowship  which  should  be  closer,  and  I  leave 
with  you  for  consideration  the  interests  of  this  greatest  instrumen- 
tality for  religious  advancement  and  human  good, — the  religious 
press. 

A  general  discussion  followed. 


PROF.  JEAN  REVILLE,  D.D. 
Paris,  France 


PROF.  G.  BONET-MAURY,  DD. 
Paris,  France 


REV.  L.  E.  T.  ANDRE,  D.D. 
Florence,  Italy 


ABBE  ALBERT  HOUTIN 
Paris,  France 


469 


DEPARTMENT   OF  COMITY  AND   FELLOWSHIP. 

Meeting  held  in  King's  Chapel,  Wednesday,  September  25,  3.30 
p.m.,  Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  of  Chicago,  presiding. 

Mr.  Jones. — Friends,  the  hour  fixed  for  this  meeting  has  arrived. 
We  are  here  to  find  out  what  we  are  going  to  do  about  it.  We  have 
been  delighted  to  find  how  much  akin  we  are.  Our  friends  have 
crossed  the  seas  and  climbed  the  mountains  to  get  here.  They  have 
crossed  the  deeper  seas  and  climbed  the  higher  mountains  of  race 
prejudices,  theological  animosities,  sectarian  distrust.  They  have 
come  and  found  themselves  in  delightful  accord.  They  have  found 
themselves  one  in  the  strength  and  joy  of  comradeship  and  fellowship. 

If  I  understand  the  object  of  this  section  this  afternoon,  it  is  to 
inquire  whether  this  experience  is  to  be  only  a  delightful  spasm, 
only  a  talking-fest,  only  a  tea-party  in  religion.  We  know  that  there 
are  great  tasks  awaiting  us.  We  know  that  there  are  great  problems 
unsolved,  and  we  know  in  our  moments  of  frankness  that,  as  the 
battle  is  now  carried  on  in  many  sections  and  on  many  points,  it  must 
be  a  losing  battle.  Despite  all  the  congratulations  and  all  the  sur- 
prises of  these  days  it  still  remains  true  that  the  minister  in  religion 
is  the  last  to  yield  to  the  spirit  of  the  age  which  calls  for  co-operation 
and  combination.  The  industrial  world  does  learn  at  least  the 
wastefulness  of  competition.  The  industrial  world  has  learned  the 
economic  value  of  combination.  Now  we  have  to  investigate,  some- 
times with  microscopic  instruments,  to  find  the  names  and  the  things 
that  keep  us  apart  in  the  great  realm  of  religion;  and  still  these 
microscopic  differences,  these  antique  traditions,  these  obsolete 
names  and  fancies,  obtain  effectually  when  we  face  the  great  tasks  of 
the  world.  Universalist,  Unitarian,  Quaker,  Congregationalist, 
find  themselves  in  this  presence  thinking  the  same  thoughts  on  man, 
duty,  destiny,  do  they  not?  They  are  learning  to  speak  with  great 
confidence  their  affection  for  the  Man  of  Nazareth  and  their  loyalty 


47° 

to  the  great  Missionary  to  the  Gentiles.  And  still  if  you  go  to  any 
cross-roads  here,  touch  any  New  England  village  in  its  purity  and 
its  power  and  study  it  on  its  religious  side,  you  are  apt  to  find 
its  weakness  and  its  imbecility. 

I  am  reminded  of  a  story  of  Father  Taylor,  who  landed  in  one  of 
these  New  England  villages  on  a  winter  night,  and  the  deacon  who 
took  care  of  him  stopped  to  count  the  spires, — "One,  two,  three, 
four,  five,  six,  seven  spires."  Said  the  deacon,  "Father  Taylor,  the 
Lord  has  come  into  this  place:  see  seven  churches  here."  "No, 
no,"  said  the  old  prophet,  "the  Lord  has  gone,  and  the  devil  has 
come.  You  may  be  sure  there  is  war  all  along  the  line  in  a  place  of 
this  size  that  tries  to  maintain  seven  churches."  He  had  entered 
into  the  higher  secrets  of  faith  and  the  higher  meaning  of  religion. 

What  are  we  going  to  do  about  it?  Are  there  not  some  things 
that  we  can  do  together  that  we  now  try  to  do  with  great  loyalty 
apart?  Is  this  international  body  going  to  scatter  and  go  to  their 
homes  without  feeling  that  they  have  received  a  high  commission, 
a  charge  to  carry  out  in  their  respective  places?  Here  we  talk  of 
peace:  how  much  can  we  do  together  as  ministers  of  religion  to 
bring  about  the  disarmament  of  nations?  We  see  the  pain  and 
sorrow  and  waste  that  comes  from  the  bitterness  of  race  prejudices. 
How  much  is  this  International  Congress  going  to  do  towards  lev- 
elling up  their  constituencies  into  the  harmonies  they  talk  about, 
into  the  fraternities  they  expound,  and  the  brotherhood  they  believe 
in,  when  they  go  to  International  Congresses  ?  Those  are  the  prob- 
lems. I  am  not  here  to  discuss  them,  I  am  simply  asked  to  make 
the  wheels  go  round;  and  I  hope  that  there  will  be  many  wheels  to 
go  round  this  afternoon  on  this  line.  But  it  would  be  ungracious 
in  me  to  spoil  the  clear  argument  and  the  wise  statement  that  the 
gentlemen  have  prepared  to  give  us  who  are  to  follow  me. 

The  first  speaker  fittingly  is  the  Chairman  of  the  New  York  State 
Conference  of  Religion,  Dr.  J.  M.  Whiton,  of  New  York. 


47i 


THE  NEW  SPIRIT  AND  ITS  RISING  TIDE. 

BY  JAMES  M.   WHITON,   "THE  OUTLOOK,"  NEW  YORK. 

The  New  York  State  Conference  of  Religion,  for  which  I  have 
the  honor  to  speak  to-day  as  one  of  the  co-operating  bodies  in  this 
Congress,  was  organized  a  year  earlier  than  this  Council  and  on  the 
same  basis,  with  the  same  motto,  and  with  the  same  inclusive  fellow- 
ship,— a  fellowship  more  inclusive  than  any  other  in  our  State, — in- 
cluding Jews  on  absolute  equality  with  Christians  in  our  Executive 
Committee,  in  all  our  meetings.  We  meet  in  Jewish  synagogues 
just  as  freely  as  we  meet  in  Christian  churches,  and  among  all  the 
members  of  the  State  Conference  of  Religion  I  know  none  who  are 
more  enthusiastic  in  its  promotion  and  in  the  principles  it  stands  for 
than  some  of  our  friends  in  the  reformed  wing  of  Judaism.  And 
the  New  York  Conference  brings  you  greeting  to-day  and  salutation 
on  the  New  Spirit  and  its  Rising  Tide. 

That  a  Copernican  revolution  has  taken  place  in  religious  thought 
during  the  last  half-century,  none  can  be  so  deeply  conscious  as  those 
of  us  who  have  long  memories.  It  is  one  of  the  advantages  of  a  long 
life  that  one  can  cover  the  time  between  the  day  when  the  builders 
rejected  the  stone  and  the  day  when  it  was  made  the  head  of  the 
corner.  The  revolution  has  been  from  the  distinctively  mediaeval 
to  the  distinctively  modern  conception  of  the  way  and  the  working 
of  God  in  this  world.  The  New  Spirit  thus  arising,  as  "the  thoughts 
of  men  are  widened  with  the  process  of  the  suns,"  has  drawn  the 
old-time  disputants  together,  to  see  eye  to  eye  and  join  hand  to 
hand,  by  its  substitution  of  the  scientific  temper  for  the  dogmatic, 
and  by  the  precedence  it  secures  for  religion  above  the  philosophy 
of  religion. 

I  wish  I  had  time  to  say  what  this  suggests  to  me  respecting  that 
which  is  still  the  goal  of  hope  for  many  of  us,  the  reunion  of  the 
divided  sections — not  divided  now  so  far  apart  as  formerly — of  the 
historic  church  of  New  England,  the  church  of  the  "Mayflower,"  the 
church  of  the  Winthrop  colony  that  settled  Tri-mountain,  where  we 
stand,  in  1630.    It  is  coming.    Some  of  you  will  live  to  see  it. 


472 

"Religion  unites  where  theology  divides."  We  lift  to  Heaven  our 
prayer,  Thy  will  be  done.  This  prayer  is  the  symbol  of  the  pro- 
foundest  unity,  compatible  with  many  diversities  of  formulary  and 
form.  Jew,  Mohammedan,  Brahmin,  Christian,  lifting  that  prayer 
together,  feel  alike,  "We  are  many:  we  are  one." 

Look  at  our  gold  or  silver  coins.  Read  on  one  side  the  national 
Confession  of  Faith,  In  God  we  Trust,  placed  there  in  May,  1865, 
by  Act  of  Congress,  one  month  after  the  Republic  had  emerged  with 
victory  from  its  four  years'  fight  for  life.  Read  on  the  other  side  the 
national  motto  of  our  forty-five  States,  so  diverse  and  sometimes  dis- 
cordant in  their  local  interests,  E  pluribus  Unum, — one  in  their  atti- 
tude toward  the  world,  like  the  cloud  that  "moveth  altogether,  if 
it  move  at  all."  Here  the  political  world  has  realized  the  ideal  that 
is  still  beckoning  to  the  religious  world,  of  which  a  glimpse  and  a 
foretaste  is  presented  in  this  Congress.  Here  we  have  to-day  an 
JE  pluribus  Unum,  with  the  confession  of  faith  that  makes  us  one: 
In  God  we  Trust,  the  true  and  ultimate  "Formula  of  Concord." 

Important  as  it  is  that  men  should  think  alike, — and  they  will 
think  alike  in  religion  as  in  astronomy,  in  degree  as  the  Copernican 
revolution  succeeds  in  diffusing  and  popularizing  the  regulative  ideas 
of  modern  as  distinct  from  mediaeval  thought, — the  concord  of  wills 
is  more  important  than  the  concord  of  intellects.  Psychologically 
and  practically,  the  man  is  centred  in  the  will.  Apart  from  the  will, 
the  whole  man  is  not  carried  into  action,  however  he  may  speculate, 
philosophize,  or  feel.  To  effect  anything  in  the  world,  religious  unity 
must  be  a  unity  of  wills.  The  central  aspiration  of  the  religious 
spirit  that  trusts  in  God  is  to  link  the  human  will  with  the  divine  for 
the  fulfilment  of  its  prayer,  "Thy  will  be  done,  as  in  heaven,  so  on 
earth." 

Right  here  appeared  to  us  in  New  York  the  point  of  urgency, — 
to  affirm  the  unity  of  the  religious  spirit  in  the  supreme  interest  of  the 
religious  will.  That  is  to  say,  of  real  religion  as  distinct  from  mere 
religiosity.  God's  will  can  be  done  only  as  men  can  be  got  to  do  it; 
and  they  must  be  got  to  do  it.  Behold,  then,  the  present  riot  of  self- 
ish greed  and  libertinism  and  fraud  and  lawlessness  which  de- 
moralizes so  large  a  part  of  American  life  to-day,  and  reports  our 
national  shame  throughout  the  world.  That  no  such  moral  crisis 
is  looming  up  in  other  lands,  no  one  will  affirm.     Bishop  Gore,  of  the 


473 

Anglican  Church,  said  a  year  ago  "that,  paradoxical  as  it  sounds, 
Christian  people  do  not  yet  understand  what  Christian  morality 
really  is, "  as  distinct  from  the  morality  of  custom.  The  New  York 
Conference  has  been  saying  this  for  years.  Are  the  churches  and 
synagogues,  each  holding  its  own  fort  separately,  able  to  roll  back 
the  threatening  tide?  If  it  is  high  time,  as  was  said  twenty-five 
years  ago,  to  call  out  all  the  moral  reserves,  the  most  potent  voice 
is  the  voice  of  religion.  But  it  must  be  raised  with  a  will  all  along 
the  line  by  every  regiment  and  brigade, — not  as  Methodists  or  Uni- 
tarians, Episcopalians  or  Jews,  but  rather  as  simply  religious  men, 
united  in  the  supreme  passion  of  religion  to  suppress  all  iniquity 
by  the  enthronement  of  God's  righteousness  in  human  hearts  and 
human  laws.  And,  in  confronting  the  present  moral  crisis,  religious 
men  may  well  adopt  the  saying  of  the  author  of  "Ecco  Homo": 
"No  heart  is  pure  that  is  not  passionate;  no  virtue  safe  that  is  not 
enthusiastic."  Unity  can  come  only  so.  It  is  just  in  the  flame  of 
enthusiasm  for  the  furtherance  of  the  moral  government  of  God  and 
the  enthronement  of  the  righteousness  of  God  that  our  differences 
are  fused  together  in  the  unity  of  the  forward  movement. 

I  have  interested  myself  largely  in  the  deeper  problems  of  relig- 
ious thought,  with  the  result  of  a  growing  consciousness  of  unity  with 
others  who  approached  the  same  from  different  points  of  preposses- 
sion or  prejudice.  But  the  conviction  has  also  grown  that  the  vast 
majority  of  men  will  for  a  long  time  care  little  about  the  agreements 
which  we  work  out  in  the  science  or  philosophy  of  religion.  Not  these 
will  bring  men  to  trust  in  God,  or  to  do  the  will  of  God,  or  to  strive 
for  the  righteousness  of  God  in  the  unity  of  a  spiritual  morality  and  a 
thoroughly  ethical  religion.  For  this  result  the  religious  unity  that 
we  proclaim  and  exemplify,  and  the  religious  liberalism  which  fosters 
that  unity,  must  crystallize  in  forms  of  will  and  act  as  well  as  in  forms 
of  statement-  it  must  be  dynamic  against  concrete  wrong  and  wicked- 
ness, militant  not  only  against  superstition  and  priestcraft  and  popery, 
whether  Roman  or  Protestant,  but  still  more  against  all  unright- 
eousness, social  or  personal,  and  all  the  economic  wrongs  that  still 
defraud  multitudes  of  our  laboring  people  of  their  rightful  share,  not 
so  much  of  property,  but  rather  of  opportunity  to  lead  normal  and 
wholesome  lives.  With  the  normal  aspirations  of  these  disinherited 
ones  the  cause  of  liberal  religion  must  actively  identify  itself;  for  the 


474 

ultimate  test  of  religion  is  in  what  it  can  do  to  humanize  and  to  in- 
spire the  lowest  ranks  of  the  social  body. 

This  practical  world  of  ours  is  ever  demanding  of  the  prophet  a 
sign:  "What  sign  showest  thou?  What  dost  thou  work,  that  we 
may  see  and  believe?"  We  do  well  to  trust  in  God  and  confess 
sonship  to  God.  We  shall  do  well  to  remember  the  ancient  word: 
"For  this  purpose  the  Son  of  God  was  manifested,  that  he  might 
destroy  the  works  of  the  devil."  Only  so  can  the  Son  of  God  manifest 
himself  as  such,  and  make  his  epiphany  complete  and  convincing. 

Mr.  Jones.  Parliamentary  bodies  have  a  way  of  unloading  them- 
selves from  a  mass  of  detail  and  confusion  that  comes  from  too  much 
elaboration  by  moving  the  previous  question.  That  clears  the  deck 
and  gets  back  the  first  issue.  Our  Quaker  friends  a  long  time  ago 
moved  the  previous  question  in  religion.  When  scholars  were  con- 
fused and  dazed  over  the  question,  "What  readest  thou?"  they 
said,  "What  thinkest  thou?"  When  ecclesiastics  were  entangled  in 
their  ropes  of  their  own  weavings,  they  moved  the  previous  question 
and  asked,  "How  feelest  thou?"  If  you  and  I  agree  upon  the  text, 
look  inward,  and  perhaps  you  will  have  a  little  revelation  on  your 
own  account  and  get  a  good  ways  on  the  strength  of  that  revela- 
tion. I  know  not  why  it  is  that  too  often  in  making  up  our  cata- 
logues of  Liberal  forces  and  Liberal  men  these  Friends  who  have  so 
effectually  moved  the  previous  question  and  carried  all  of  us  nearer 
to  the  heart  of  things  are  left  out.  I  am  glad  that  in  this  program 
this  afternoon  there  is  provision  made  for  a  representative  of  this 
fellowship.  He  does  not  represent  this  fellowship,  all  fellowships, 
our  fellowship,  but  Fellowship.  Henry  W.  Wilbur,  of  the  So- 
ciety for  the  Promotion  of  Friends'  Principles,  will  now  address  us. 


HENRY  W.   WILBUR,  OF  PHILADELPHIA. 

The  great  trouble  in  all  matters  when  we  undertake  to  discuss 
the  question  of  fellowship  is  that  we  give  altogether  too  much  time 
to  our  denominational  fences.  We  give  too  much  time  to  the  possi- 
bility of  burning  these  fences.  It  is  not  necessary  to  burn  them. 
If  we  keep  on  in  the  even  tenor  of  our  way,  the  tooth  of  time  will 


475 

eat  them  up  anyway,  so  we  need  not  worry  about  that.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  drown  individuality  in  order  to  remove  our  differences: 
we  may  remove  our  differences  and  maintain  our  individuality,  and 
the  test  of  the  whole  matter  comes  largely  in  our  ability  to  do  ex- 
actly that  thing.  The  principal  thing  that  we  need  now  to  line  up 
the  Liberal  forces  in  behalf  of  the  things  that  ought  to  be  done,  and 
ought  to  be  done  from  our  standpoint  and  with  the  spirit  which  we 
can  put  into  their  doing,  is  that  we  shall  co-operate  in  spirit  rather 
than  to  attempt  to  form  a  paper  fellowship  or  a  great  religious  trust 
which  shall  put  all  other  opponents  out  of  business.  What  we  want 
is  not  the  great  religious  trust  which  shall  swallow  up  all  these  in- 
dividual expressions  of  human  thought  and  human  truth,  but  such 
a  fellowship  of  spirit  and  of  feeling  as  will  make  us  unite  our  efforts 
along  certain  lines  in  our  own  individual  ways  and  aiming  at  the 
common  result. 

We  shall  never  make  very  much  progress,  however,  until  we  get 
a  different  notion  of  what  we  call  broadness.  To  many  of  us  broad- 
ness is  simply  a  frothy  sentiment  which  does  not  mean  very  much 
except  for  dress  parade  purposes.  It  very  often  happens  that  our 
broadness  has  become  narrowness;  and  how  often  has  that  narrow- 
ness been  our  condemnation!  Real  broadness  makes  us  able  to 
take  in,  in  the  study  of  the  sweep  and  swing  of  things,  a  fair  recog- 
nition of  the  good  and  grace  that  there  has  been  in  every  religious 
system  which  the  world  has  ever  seen  that  is  fundamental  to  the 
consideration  of  the  whole  proposition,  and  to  be  able  to  see  that 
every  one  of  these  systems  has  made  some  contribution  towards 
clarifying  the  atmosphere  and  towards  bringing  us  a  little  bit  nearer 
to  the  thing  for  which  we  all  aim,  and  that  is  the  establishment  of 
the  real  brotherhood  among  men.  We  do  not  have  to  break  up 
our  family  lines  in  order  to  attain  a  fellowship  and  a  united  spirit  in  a 
neighborhood,  and  we  do  not  need  to  break  up  all  our  religious  lines, 
if  that  is  the  right  word  to  use,  in  order  to  be  sure  of  having  comity 
and  fellowship  in  the  religious  world.  The  whole  thing  is  a  matter 
of  spirit. 

There  has  been  a  germ  of  truth  lurking  in  the  midst  even  of  the 
world's  mythologies.  When  men  groped  their  way  darkly,  and  in 
that  groping  saw  a  divinity  in  ever)'  flower  and  a  spirit  in  every  grove, 
they  were  simply  doing  their  best  to  make  an  apprehension  of  the 


476 

larger  truth  which  has  come  to  us  of  the  universal  pervading,  resi- 
dent divinity.  What  they  wanted  was  a  resident  divinity,  and  they 
got  it  by  chopping  divinity  up.  What  we  want  is  a  resident  Divin- 
ity which  is  united  and  lives  and  breathes  and  moves  in  the  world 
of  His  creation  and  inspires  all  hearts  to  the  doing  of  His  will. 

There  was  the  germ  of  a  tremendous  truth  in  the  postulate  that 
was  made  during  the  old  Deuteronomic  reformation  in  the  times  of 
King  Josiah,  when  what  now  seems  to  us  the  foolish  geographical 
proposition  was  laid  down — very  logically,  to  be  sure,  as  far  as  it 
went — that,  inasmuch  as  God  was  one,  he  could  only  be  worshipped 
in  one  place,  and  that  place  was  Jerusalem.  There  was  a  germ  of 
truth  in  that.  God  is  one,  and  he  can  only  be  adequately  worshipped 
in  one  place,  but  it  is  not  Jerusalem  nor  any  other  place  on  the  map. 
The  only  place  where  God  can  be  worshipped  is  in  the  individual 
human  heart.  There,  there  he  sets  up  his  holy  shekinah,  and  there 
are  just  as  many  holy  shekinahs  as  there  are  human  hearts  in  the 
universe. 

Let  us  be  able  to  see  that  truth  which  will  tend  toward  that  broad- 
ness which  will  land  us  where  we  ought  to  be, — in  the  midst  of  a 
genuine  brotherhood. 

But  possibly  we  may  test  the  whole  matter  more  clearly  by  trying 
to  find  out  the  particular  contribution  to  the  great  range  of  broad 
fellowship  we  have  individually  made  to  the  world's  progress.  And 
what  I  say  now  is  not  to  magnify  a  very  weak  and  meagre  and  poor 
denomination,  but  simply  to  point  a  moral  and  adorn  a  tale. 

The  Religious  Society  of  Friends  managed  to  behave  itself  fairly 
well  for  nearly  two  hundred  years  in  substantial  unity,  but  after  a 
while  that  demon  of  theological  doctrine  which  has  gnawed  at  the 
vitals  and  the  spiritual  fibre  of  our  race  from  the  beginning  crept  in, 
and  we  quarrelled  and  we  divided.  But  for  eighty  years  the  branch 
of  the  society  which  happens  to  be  represented  here  to-day  has  been 
more  and  more  making  a  somewhat  substantial  contribution  to  illus- 
trate the  fact  that  there  can  be  genuine  unity  of  spirit  in  the  midst 
of  great  diversity  of  individual  opinion.  We  have  among  us  a  num- 
ber of  very  excellent  people  who  believe  in  the  Virgin  birth,  in  the 
Trinity,  in  the  literal  resurrection,  and  all  of  the  postulates  of  evan- 
gelical theology.  We  have  a  still  larger  number  who  do  not  believe 
in  any  of  them,  and  we  have  a  still  larger  number  who  don't  care 


477 

a  copper  about  them,  who  give  them  no  thought,  who  do  not  con- 
sider them  vital  to  the  building  of  the  right  spiritual  life.  But  in 
the  midst  of  all  this  we  have  reached  the  point  where  there  is  abso- 
lutely no  theological  quarrelling,  and  a  historian,  not  of  our  faith,  has 
recently  declared  that  it  is  a  common  thing  to  hear  absolutely  di- 
verse opinions  in  the  same  meetings  for  religious  worship.  That  is  a 
fact,  and  yet  in  the  midst  of  all  that  we  maintain  a  reasonable  de- 
gree of  fellowship  and  unity  and  harmony,  and  have  reached  a  point 
where  one  man  never  feels  himself  called  upon  to  antagonize  an- 
other man's  thinking.  That  seems  to  me  to  be  a  distinct  contri- 
bution on  a  small  scale  towards  the  development  of  that  spirit  which, 
when  it  becomes  universal,  will  have  settled  the  whole  matter. 

The  reason  why  this  position  has  been  reached  is  simply  this: 
that  it  has  dawned  upon  us  somehow  or  other  that  our  entire  busi- 
ness is  to  seek  to  interpret  the  message  and  carry  out  the  mission  of 
Jesus  Christ.  And  that  can  be  summed  up  in  a  single  sentence, — to 
bring  the  kingdom  of  God  among  men.  What  we  may  think  about 
a  thousand  theological  principles  necessarily  has  nothing  to  do  with 
bringing  the  kingdom  of  God  among  men,  for  "the  kingdom  of 
God  cometh  not  by  observation,"  neither  does  it  come  by  much 
speculation,  neither  does  it  come  by  wrangling  or  contention,  but  it 
comes  in  attempting  to  get  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  among  men.  So, 
therefore,  as  exclusive  as  we  have  been  in  the  years  that  are  gone, 
we  are  beginning  to  approach  at  any  rate  a  certain  degree  of  broad- 
ness in  feeling  that,  if  the  whole  world  were  made  up  of  Quakers,  it 
would  be  a  somewhat  sombre  and  unsatisfactory  world  after  all, 
that  diversity  of  opinion  and  of  method,  both  of  worship  and  of  liv- 
ing, has  some  merit.  And  we  are  beginning  to  see  in  the  midst  of 
our  protest  and  our  testimony  against  formalism  that  possibly  there 
may  rest  behind  form  and  ceremony  a  measure  of  the  same  spirit 
which  beats  beneath  our  formless  and  creedless  little  communion. 
And  it  is  this  fellowship  of  the  spirit  which  we  must  have,  which  we 
will  have  if  we  try  for. 

I  believe  that  the  message  of  the  time  to-day  to  Liberal  religious 
people  is  simply  that  they  may  be  inspired  to  do  about  half  as 
well  as  they  know  how.  We  have  reached  a  splendid  position  re- 
garding many  things,  very  delightful  to  ourselves.  We — the  Quaker 
and  the  Unitarian  and  the  Universalist — believe  in  the  immanent 


478 

God;  believe,  as  Clement  said  in  the  second  century,  that  "the 
Creator  hath  filled  the  universe  with  the  seed  of  salvation";  believe 
with  George  Fox  that  a  measure  of  the  seed  of  God  has  been  planted 
in  every  human  soul.  We  believe  that,  the  whole  of  us,  but  we  are 
a  good  deal  like  the  small  boy  in  the  Quaker  kindergarten.  The 
teacher  had  a  way  of  taking  the  little  fellows  when  they  became 
obstreperous,  and  keeping  them  off  by  themselves  and  telling  them 
that,  if  they  kept  still,  they  would  hear  something  inside  of  them  tell- 
ing them  what  was  right  to  do.  So  she  put  this  little  fellow  behind 
the  screen,  and  went  to  him  in  about  fifteen  minutes  and  asked, 
"Well,  John,  what  is  it?"  And  the  little  fellow  said,  "It's  a-talking 
all  right,  but  I  ain't  hearing  it."  That  is  the  trouble  with  many  of 
us  Liberal  people.  We  believe  in  the  spirit  inside  of  us,  we  know 
that  it  is  talking  all  right,  but  we  don't  hear  it. 

Now  what  do  we  owe — what  do  we  owe  as  Liberal  people — in  the 
direction  of  a  united  fellowship  and  a  wide  comity  in  the  midst  of 
the  perplexing  and  complex  civilization  in  which  we  find  ourselves? 
We  need  simply  this:  to  learn  that  where  in  some  places  some  of 
us  are  too  weak  to  do  a  thing  alone,  by  using  a  vulgar  term  heard 
on  the  street, — by  "pooling  our  issues," — not  by  pulling  down  our 
fences,  but  by  pooling  our  issues,  by  uniting  our  forces  in  an  effort 
to  put  light  where  there  is  darkness,  physical  light  where  there  is 
physical  darkness,  we  may  do  something  in  that  direction,  for  the 
broadening  outlook  teaches  us  that  we  shall  never  bring  the  kingdom 
of  God  among  men  in  the  midst  of  a  submerged  society  divided  into 
classes  and  clans  and  prejudices  and  hatreds.  The  kingdom  of  God 
can  only  be  brought  in  the  midst  of  society  by  establishing  an 
absolute  conception  of  the  common  brotherhood  and  the  universal 
Father.  We  all  of  us  like  to  believe  that  and  to  talk  about  it,  and 
it  is  all  very  pleasant  to  us  that  the  best  of  men  are  the  sons  of  God 
and  our  brothers;  but  the  simple  fact  is  that  the  worst  of  men  are 
the  sons  of  God  and  our  brothers  just  the  same.  And,  until  we  get 
able  to  see  that,  all  of  our  broadness  will  amount  to  nothing.  And 
to  see  and  to  feel  it  and  to  know  it,  in  the  midst  of  the  civilization  of 
which  we  are  a  part,  would  let  a  great  amount  of  daylight  into  most 
of  the  economic  and  public  questions  before  us  for  settlement  to-day. 

Then,  again,  we  have  given  altogether  too  much  time,  some  of  us, 
to  doing  missionary  work  among  the  poor.    The  Liberals  to-day 


479 

in  this  country  ought  to  organize  a  world-wide  mission  to  the  rich. 
That  is  not  as  nonsensical  as  it  sounds.  What  I  mean  by  that  is 
simply  this:  that,  ever  since  the  world  began,  the  people  at  the  top 
of  society  have  set  the  pace  for  society.  Half  of  the  peculation  and 
the  fraud,  half  of  the  extravagance  and  the  folly,  half  of  the  pride 
and  hatred,  which  consume  our  American  civilization,  is  because  of 
the  constant  effort  of  those  at  the  bottom  to  ape  those  at  the  top. 
If  there  could  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  spirits  of  the  men  and  the 
women  in  this  country  who  really  set  the  pace  a  single  conception 
of  the  simplicity  and  dignity  of  the  genuine  religion  of  the  Master, 
it  would  pull  down  two-thirds  of  all  the  class  barriers  we  have  in  the 
world,  and  would  help  usher  in  the  common  brotherhood  more 
quickly  than  anything  else. 

Half  of  the  splendid  impulse  in  our  civilization,  half  of  the  splen- 
did zeal  of  our  humanity,  is  consumed  in  our  time  in  the  vulgar  dis- 
play of  the  rich  and  in  the  not  more  vulgar  effort  of  the  poor  to  keep 
up  with  them.  And  to  make  it  perfectly  plain  that  society  needs 
reforming  from  the  top  as  well  as  from  the  bottom  is  one  of  the 
concerns  regarding  which  the  whole  Liberal  Church  might  profitably 
and  successfully  unite  their  individual  forces  and  forget  for  the  time 
being  their  individual  fences.  There  is  scarcely  a  neighborhood 
represented  in  this  meeting  this  afternoon  that  does  not  present  a 
concrete  example  of  some  of  the  things  that  could  be  done  in  that 
community  to  make  life  more  worth  the  living. 

The  kingdom  of  God  can  never  come  among  men  while  half  of  the 
world  confesses  that  it  does  not  know  how  the  other  half  lives,  and  is 
glad  of  it.  The  kingdom  of  God  will  never  come  among  men  until 
those  who  have  seen  the  precious  delight  and  felt  the  moving  of  the 
Spirit,  and  know  what  justice  is,  have  helped  to  make  the  moving 
of  the  Spirit  and  justice  the  common  heritage  of  their  neighbors  in 
the  community  where  they  dwell.  These  are  the  common  things 
regarding  which  we  could  very  easily  unite. 

Again,  and  possibly  last,  we  could  unite  in  demonstrating  a  fact 
against  a  fiction.  For  all  these  centuries  we  have  been  chopping 
ourselves  up  as  men  and  women  into  sections,  dividing  ourselves  into 
intellectual  and  moral  and  spiritual  and  physical  beings  and  dealing 
with  them  piecemeal.  The  new  revelation,  the  larger  light,  the  com- 
pleter liberty,  is  involved  in  the  conception  that  man  is  a  solidarity, 


480 

that  the  wisest  philosopher  that  ever  lived  cannot  tell  where  his  body 
leaves  off  and  his  mind  begins,  cannot  tell  where  his  mind  leaves 
off  and  his  spirit  begins.  We  have  got  to  learn  to  deal  with  men  as 
men,  as  a  whole,  not  talk  about  these  things  being  intellectual,  these 
things  being  physical,  and  these  things  being  moral  and  these  things 
being  spiritual.  We  have  got  to  learn  that  there  is  more  of  the  grace 
of  God  in  some  communities  in  taking  education  into  them  than  there 
is  in  giving  them  tracts ;  teaching  them  to  so  deal  with  the  forces  of 
nature  that  they  shall  be  able  to  get  out  of  them  the  largest  amount 
of  life  and  liberty,  and  the  greatest  amount  of  real  comfort  in  the 
world  which  they  inhabit.  First  that  which  is  natural,  and  then 
that  which  is  spiritual,  if  there  is  any  division  at  all. 

The  time  has  come  when  the  message  of  the  Liberal  Church  has 
become  more  practical  than  any  message  that  ever  came  to  the  world 
before.  We  do  not  have  to  run  the  universe,  we  do  not  even  have  to 
tell  the  Almighty  how  to  do  it:  we  can  trust  it  to  Him.  We  do  not 
have  to  solve  the  mysteries,  for  it  is  very  few  mysteries  that  have 
been  solved  since  you  and  I  can  remember.  Modern  science,  with 
all  its  splendid  discoveries,  has  left  the  great  facts  and  mysteries  con- 
cerning the  origin  of  life  as  dim  and  dark  as  they  were  when  it  began. 
But  it  has  given  us  a  theory  of  the  universe.  The  message  of  the 
Liberal  Church  to-day  does  not  solve  the  great  eternal  mysteries  at 
all,  but  it  gives  us  a  rational  theory  of  the  spiritual  universe.  It 
gives  us  a  complete  and  universal  Fatherhood;  it  gives  us  a  general 
brotherhood,  a  common  kinship,  and  makes  us  able  to  see  that  because 
of  this  general  kinship  and  this  common  brotherhood  it  becomes  us  to 
so  listen  to  the  moving  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  waters  of  our  lives  that 
out  of  our  lives  shall  come  that  helpful  concern,  that  applied  Chris- 
tianity, that  religion  put  in  practice,  which  shall  make  men  better 
equipped  on  their  physical  side,  make  them  better  equipped  on  their 
intellectual  side,  make  men  better  equipped  for  all  things  of  this  world, 
making  them  fit  to  live  here  before  we  provide  for  them  large  rela- 
tions in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  yonder. 

Mr.  Jones. — You  expect  me  to  so  run  this  meeting  that  we  can 
have  three  or  four  more  twenty-minute  speeches  in  the  next  half-hour. 
Is  Dr.  J,  H.  Asbeck,  of  Pittsburg,*  in  the  room?    He  represents 

*  Dr.  Asbeck,  to  his  great  regret,  was  prevented  at  the  last  moment  by  illness  from  attend- 
ing the  Congress,  of  which  he  was  a  member. 


48 1 

the  German  fellowship  and  the  German  Evangelical  Church.     His 
name  is  on  the  program  and  he  is  expected  to  speak. 

One  of  the  first  graduates  of  Horace  Mann  will  next  address  you, 
the  man  on  whose  shoulders  fell  to  a  degree  the  mantle  of  that  great 
prophet,  a  man  who  represents  a  fellowship  which  has  tried  to  move 
the  previous  question  in  Christian  terminology,  which  refuses  any 
other  label  than  that  of  the  word  "Christian."  Rev.  Dr.  J.  B. 
Weston,  of  New  York,  will  next  address  you. 


REMARKS  OF  REV.  J.  B.  WESTON,  D.D.,  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  CHRIS- 
TIAN  BIBLICAL   INSTITUTE,   STANFORDVILLE,    N.Y. 

I  began  to  write  some  things  for  this  occasion,  but  I  do  not  dare  look 
at  them.  This  subject  is  one  to  which  I  have  never  needed  to  be 
converted,  for  I  was  born  that  way;  and  I  am  heartily  glad  to  have 
lived  to  see  this  meeting  at  which  representative  men  and  women  of 
broad  sympathies,  of  earnest  purpose,  of  consecrated  endeavor,  meet 
together  to  consider  the  interests  of  intellectual  liberty  and  practical 
action.  For  what  is  thought  good  for  unless  it  is  coined  into  action  ? 
What  is  the  use  of  liberty  in  thinking  unless  it  is  coined  into  activity 
in  doing  ?  What  is  the  use,  as  yourself  just  said, — what  is  the  use  of 
this  convention  if  it  is  to  be  merely  a  liberalized  tea  party,  to  be  repro- 
duced two  years  hence,  simply  with  another  tea  party  ?  We  are  here 
for  inspiration;  but  what  is  the  use  of  inspiration  unless  that  inspira- 
tion means  something  solidly  done  for  the  cause  that  inspires  us? 

I  say,  sir,  it  is  a  gratification  to  me  to  enjoy  this  meeting  and  to  be  a 
humble  part  in  it.  Beginning  my  life  in  the  northerly  part  of  Maine, 
where  the  pines  grow  tall  and  where  the  air  comes  fresh  and  free 
over  the  northern  mountains  and  the  broad  forests,  I  was  born  a  free 
man.  And  that  spirit  of  freedom  has  grown  with  my  growth  and 
strengthened  with  my  strength.  And  enjoying,  as  you  yourself  have 
kindly  remarked,  for  six  years  the  daily  association  in  school  life  with 
that  great  hero,  Horace  Mann,  every  element  of  liberty,  every  enthu- 
siastic purpose  for  the  welfare  of  mankind,  was  made  the  stronger 
thereby,  and  that  has  been  my  life.  And  so  it  needed  no  conversion 
on  my  part  to  come  into  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  this  convention. 


482 

I  stand,  moreover,  as  you  have  kindly  said,  as  the  representative 
of  a  body  that  has  in  itself  some  peculiarities.  Our  body  came 
into  existence  as  a  protest  against  ecclesiastical  domination,  and  in 
assertion  of  liberty  of  religious  thought  and  speech.  The  early 
preachers  of  this  gospel  were  prophets  of  God.  They  felt  that 
they  had  a  message,  a  message  from  God,  and,  as  it  did  not  accord 
with  the  dominant  spirit  of  their  times,  the  ecclesiastical  authority 
commanded  them  to  speak  no  more  in  His  name.  But,  like  the 
apostles  before  them,  they  said,  "Whether  it  is  right  for  us  to  hearken 
unto  you  more  than  unto  God,  judge  ye:  we  cannot  but  speak  the 
things  which  we  have  heard."  And  they  went  with  the  message  of 
God,  believing  that  God  was  the  Father  of  all,  that  Jesus  Christ 
was  the  Saviour  of  all,  that  the  message  of  salvation  was  to  all, 
that  God  was  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every  nation  he  that 
feared  Him  and  wrought  righteousness  was  accepted.  They  went 
with  that  message,  and  in  that  spirit  they  have  lived.  We  call  our- 
selves simply  Christians,  as  you  said, — not  by  any  arrogation,  not 
because  we  are  the  only  ones  or  the  exclusive  ones,  not  because  we 
are  a  special  part  by  ourselves,  for  we  are  only  a  part  of  the  univer- 
sal whole.  We  belong  to  a  church — not  the  church — that  is  as  broad 
as  the  mission  of  Christ. 

Mr.  Chairman,  you  belong  to  our  church,  and  you  cannot  help  it. 
These  brethren  belong  to  our  church,  and  they  cannot  help  it.  When- 
ever you  are  working  to  build  up  humanity,  whatever  you  are  doing 
to  deepen  religious  thought  and  bring  spiritual  conviction  into  men's 
hearts,  whenever  you  are  doing  anything  to  bring  the  reality  of  the 
Fatherhood  of  God  into  human  hearts,  whenever  you  are  doing  any- 
thing to  create  in  human  souls  the  aspiration  Godward,  whenever 
you  are  doing  anything  to  make  the  conception  of  humanity  broader 
and  the  welfare  of  man  more  intense,  you  are  working  to  build  up 
our  church.  You  are  working  in  our  cause.  For  we  believe — as 
you  do, — that  the  great  agency  in  the  world  for  the  welfare  of 
mankind  is  the  inborn  Spirit  of  the  Son  of  God.  The  agency  for 
doing  away  ill,  for  solving  the  moral  questions,  for  levelling  up  what 
is  down  and  levelling  down  what  is  up,  bringing  men  onto  a  com- 
mon level, — that  is  the  spirit  of  Him  who  is  Father  of  all,  the  spirit 
of  Him  who  came  to  be  the  Redeemer  of  all.  Representing  such  a 
body,  we  are  glad  to  be  here. 


483 

And  we  look  forward  to  greater  achievements.  There  is  going 
on  at  this  time  on  the  other  side  of  the  water  a  Hague  Conference 
in  which  representatives  of  different  nations  are  meeting  together 
to  consult  in  the  interests  of  peace,  of  national  harmony,  national 
co-operation,  the  welfare  of  the  world.  We  are  another  Hague 
Conference  on  our  own  part.  We  are  the  representatives  of  another 
class  of  workers  in  the  human  world.  We  come  from  the  different 
nations,  as  they  do.  We  come  from  different  faiths,  as  they  do, — 
not  a  different  faith,  for  faith  is  one,  faiths  are  multiple.  The  little 
faiths  here  are  different,  but  we  come  from  the  one  grand  faith.  I 
was  glad  to  see  on  the  vice-presidentship  of  this  Association  such 
men  as  Robert  Collyer  and  Oscar  S.  Straus  along  with  Charles  E. 
Jefferson  and  George  A.  Gordon,  representing  I  care  not  how  wide 
extremes  in  one  sense,  but  all  one  in  the  pulsations  of  humanity  that 
bring  us  here  together. 

This,  then,  is  a  milestone  of  progress,  and  I  believe  that,  as  the 
last  Hague  Conference  when  it  adjourned  had  settled  some  things, 
and  this  second  Hague  Conference  has  grander  things  to  contem- 
plate, and  I  believe  the  next  Hague  Conference  will  have  still  grander 
things  to  accomplish,  so,  when  the  next  session  of  this  body  shall  be 
held,  it  will  have  larger  achievements  already  attained,  a  broader 
work  to  do,  a  grander  courage,  a  higher  faith,  a  stronger  combination 
of  holy  zeal  and  earnest  determination  to  work  for  God  and 
man. 

Mr.  Jones. — The  next  speaker  I  am  instructed  to  call  upon  is 
the  man  who  stands  in  Dr.  Munger's  pulpit  in  New  Haven,  pastor 
of  the  United  Congregational  Church,  an  old  neighbor  of  mine  in 
Chicago, — the  Rev.  Dr.  Haynes.  Is  Dr.  Haynes  in  the  audi- 
ence ?  * 

Mr.  Jones. — Rev.  Charles  F.  Carter  comes  in  the  line  of  Haynes's 
succession,  and  is  invited  to  address  us. 

*  Rev.  Dr.  Haynes  was  a  member  of  the  Congress  and  attended  its  sessions,  but  was  called 
away  by  unexpected  duty  and  could  not  address  the  meeting  as  he  had  promised. 


484 


REMARKS    OF   REV.    CHARLES    F.    CARTER,    OF   THE   FIRST   CONGREGA- 
TIONAL CHURCH,  LEXINGTON,  MASS. 

I  am  glad  to  be  in  this  fellowship,  glad  to  have  a  man  call  upon  me, 
really,  who  intellectually,  and  in  many  ways  perhaps,  stands  at  such 
a  different  point  of  view,  because  I  rejoice  in  the  movement  that  is 
represented  by  the  gatherings  this  week,  and  one  rejoicing  in  that 
finds  it  incumbent  on  him  to  give  the  reason  for  that  faith.  Surely, 
in  the  past  we  have  somewhat  overworked — greatly  overworked — 
the  thought  of  diversity  and  the  importance  of  our  differences  in 
thinking.  We  are  getting  away  from  that  decidedly.  We  are  com- 
ing to  a  sense  of  unity.  I  raise  the  question  whether  there  is  not 
also  perpetual  danger  in  overworking  the  principle  of  identity  touch- 
ing unity.  We  must  remember  that  the  two  are  not  the  same,  that  we 
are  not  striving  to  think  alike.  We  are  striving  to  get  at  the  truth, 
and,  if  the  truth  brings  us  together,  then  indeed  we  do  rejoice.  But  in 
the  presence  of  this  great  word  which  we  are  using  and  rejoicing  in, 
this  word  "unity,"  I  believe  we  need  to  use  two  or  three  other  words, 
in  order  that  the  sharp  meaning  of  it  may  not  be  obscured,  in  order 
that  we  may  not  run  into  that  mush  of  sentiment  which  Emerson  ab- 
horred in  matters  of  feeling,  and  that  we  may  not  run  into  a  sense 
of  identity  of  thought  in  place  of  organic  unity.  Dr.  Gordon,  I  be- 
lieve, has  stated  that  in  this  era  of  theological  thought  there  has  been 
this  overworked  principle  of  identity.  I  believe  we  need  to  remember 
that.  And  the  three  words  that  I  would  bring  into  this  fellowship 
this  afternoon  are  these: — 

First,  the  word  of  a  growing  discernment.  I  do  not  think  it  is 
nearly  so  important  for  us  to  think  alike  as  it  is  to  realize  that  there 
is  an  essential  truth  in  what  the  other  man  is  thinking.  It  is  quite 
as  important  for  me  to  understand  the  other  man  as  it  is  for  him  to 
understand  me.  And  it  is  quite  as  important  for  us  to  cherish  dif- 
ferent thoughts  as  it  is  to  come  to  sameness  of  thought.  But,  if  we 
differ,  what  is  of  absolute  importance  is  that  we  emphasize  this 
word  "confer," — get  together  and  try  to  understand  the  spiritual 
significance  attaching  to  the  other  man's  point  of  view. 

I  doubt  not  that  it  would  be  easy  and  a  congenial  task  before  such 
a  gathering  as  this  to  set  forth  some  figures  from  the  Norse  mythol- 


485 

ogy,  Siegfried,  Parsifal,  and  to  win  our  mutual  recognition  of  the 
great  spiritual  ideal  involved  and  illustrated  in  those  figures. 
Would  it  be  as  easy  a  task  for  me  to  win  your  recognition  to  the 
great  spiritual  principles  involved  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and 
in  the  service  rendered  by  Athanasius  to  the  spiritual  progress  of 
mankind?  I  believe  the  temper  in  which  we  should  hold  ourselves 
should  make  as  easily  possible  the  one  as  the  other.  And,  when  I 
speak  to  an  assembly  of  recognized  and  established  Orthodoxy,  I  want 
to  feel  that  the  spirit  in  them  makes  possible  the  presentation  of 
ideas  under  the  name  of  Channing  or  Theodore  Parker,  that  they 
may  with  equal  readiness  respond  to  the  spiritual  significance  involved 
in  those  interpretations  of  Christianity.  So  we  seek  for  a  widening 
insight,  a  spirit  of  discernment  into  all  the  interpretations  of  the 
spiritual  life  that  have  been  given.  We  emphasize  the  spirit  of 
conference,  and,  doing  this,  we  emphasize  the  spirit  of  respect  for  the 
other  man.  The  thing  in  which  the  sects  have  failed  lamentably 
seems  to  be  just  that.  They  respected  very  much  their  own  indi- 
vidual opinions,  and  have  stood  for  the  right  to  maintain  those 
opinions.  Now  the  obverse  corollary  of  that  demand  for  personal 
liberty  is  an  equal  respect  for  the  other  man,  and  that  is  the  spirit 
we  need  to  show,  moving  on  in  this  great  and  splendid  stream  of 
progress. 

I  rejoice  in  the  emphasis  that  has  been  given  touching  this  move- 
ment and  its  bearing  on  practical  affairs.  I  believe  that  out  of  this 
great  sentiment  of  an  organic  union  and  a  vital  fellowship  we  are 
hearing  a  fresh  challenge.  We  are  going  to  try  to  keep  our  thought 
in  its  proper  place,  and  we  need  fundamental  thinking  to-day,  and 
never  did  we  need  it  more.  We  need  this  emphasis  on  the  will  and 
the  feeling, — the  will  that  brings  things  to  pass.  All  truth,  brings 
men  into  closer  connection  with  the  Spirit  of  God,  gives  them  really 
more  practical  inspiration,  and  the  challenge  of  the  sentiment  in 
which  we  gather  here  teaches  us  to  go  out  into  the  world,  to  look 
the  needs  of  men  squarely  in  the  face,  and  address  ourselves  to 
that  social  reconstruction  which  must  be  the  proof  of  the  vitality 
of  our  inspiration.  There  are  two  things  for  us  to  do  who  feel 
the  unity  and  the  quickening  of  this  fellowship, — first,  to  keep 
pure  the  inner  fount  of  the  personal  life,  to  keep  open  that  channel 
of  connection  with  the  divine;    and  then  under  that  inspiration  to 


486 

go  forth  and  try  as  we  may,  and  wherever  we  may,  to  reconstruct 
the  conditions  of  the  lives  of  men,  so  that  life  here  on  earth  shall 
be  fairer  and  diviner. 

Mr.  Jones. — Rev.  Charles  G.  Ames  will  now  speak  a  word  to  us. 


REV.   CHARLES   G.   AMES,   D.D.,    OF  BOSTON. 

I  asked  brother  Samuel  Eliot  what  is  going  to  be  the  big  word  of 
this  Congress,  liberty,  truth,  or  life.  He  said:  "Our  brethren  from 
abroad  will  make  it  liberty,  for  they  have  not  yet  won  it.  With  us, 
liberty  has  been  won,  and  our  business  is  to  ask  what  we  shall  do 
with  it,  what  use  we  shall  make  of  it."  It  is  in  that  spirit  that  the 
speaking  this  afternoon  has  brought  the  general  subject  before  us. 
We  have  a  measure  of  liberty,  we  have  a  measure  of  power:  the 
question  is  about  our  duty  and  our  responsibility. 

Some  things  are  still  difficult,  nevertheless,  and  I  for  one  am  afraid 
of  programs  laid  down  in  advance  of  the  readiness  of  communities 
to  receive  them,  because  once  there  was  a  time  in  my  youth  when  I 
thought  that  I  was  going  to  take  hold  of  this  world  and  help  bring  it 
right  around.  In  trying  to  do  it,  I  have  had  some  awful  jarring,  and 
the  world  hasn't  got  around  yet.  The  reason  why  The  Hague  Con- 
ference this  year  seems  likely  to  dissolve  without  agreeing  on  a  treaty 
of  arbitration  is  because  the  governments  represented  in  that  con- 
ference are  not  ready  for  it.  They  have  some  guns  and  they  think 
they  may  want  to  use  them,  and  they  hold  back.  They  have  ques- 
tions between  themselves  and  other  nations  which  they  may  not 
want  to  submit  to  arbitration,  and  they  hold  back,  which  means 
that  the  nations  are  not  yet  ready  for  universal  peace,  and  it  will  not 
come  until  they  are  ready.  I  do  not  know  whether  Providence  is 
ready  for  the  millennium  or  not.  Some  of  us  think  we  are  quite  ready 
for  it,  but  it  does  not  come,  and  it  will  not  come  next  week,  perhaps 
it  will  not  come  next  year,  but  it  is  coming  all  the  same,  and  it  is 
coming  when  it  is  due.  I  have  faith  enough  that  the  world  is  run 
on  program  to  believe  that  it  will  come  at  the  right  time. 

I  believe,  nevertheless,  that  it  is  possible  for  you  and  me  and  other 


487 

members  of  the  community  who  see  a  good  thing  in  sight  to  help 
make  that  the  universal,  common  blessing  of  mankind.  We  need 
not  wait  for  the  whole  world  to  come  around,  we  must  begin  where 
we  are,  and  in  the  solution  of  social  problems  the  place  to  begin 
on  the  part  of  these  housekeepers  is  to  begin  in  the  kitchen.  The 
place  of  the  employers  is  to  begin  with  their  employees,  the  place  of 
the  employed  is  to  begin  with  their  employers,  and,  as  soon  as  the 
spirit  of  justice  is  between  any  two,  it  will  spread;  and,  when  it  is 
established  between  many,  it  will  soon  become  the  common  law  of 
mankind. 

I  do  not  know,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  human  race  is  not  yet 
sufficiently  human  to  realize  its  own  best  possibilities.  The  hardest 
problem  we  religious  men  ever  have  to  deal  with  is  why  such  a 
Father  as  we  believe  in  should  have  such  a  family  as  we  are.  It 
seems  as  though  He  ought  to  do  better,  and  He  is  showing  us  how 
to  do  better,  and  the  very  fact  that  we  are  dissatisfied  with  ourselves, 
even  if  it  leads  us  to  be  dissatisfied  with  His  management,  is  a  good 
sign.  We  are  calling  in  question  what  is,  because  we  are  coming  in 
sight  of  what  ought  to  be,  and  all  these  things  are  hopeful.  If  Mr. 
Jones,  as  he  intimated  in  the  outset,  has  his  definite  work  planned  to 
lay  before  us  this  afternoon  before  we  part,  I  shall  listen  with  all  my 
ears;  but  I  am  not  looking  for  any  definite  program  by  which  we 
can  realize  our  ideals  with  the  general  consent  of  mankind  on  any  con- 
siderable scale,  even  in  the  most  advanced  communities  of  the  world, 
for  the  most  advanced  communities  are  still  very  far  from  being  well 
along.  We  are  living  before  the  sunrise:  there  are  signs  of  light  in 
the  east,  but  the  full  daylight  is  not  here.  That  there  is  light  in  the 
east  means  much  to  all  of  us.  I  once  asked  General  Armstrong 
what  possibility  there  was  of  any  serious  improvement  in  the  condi- 
tion of  the  colored  people  of  the  South.  I  asked  him  first,  "What 
we  hear  about  their  ignorance,  their  degradation,  their  sensuality, 
their  dishonesty,  their  laziness,  is  it  true  or  is  it  overstated?"  He 
said,  "You  cannot  paint  it  dark  enough:  it  is  worse  than  anybody 
ever  spoke  of."  I  said:  "What  hope,  then?  They  are  multiplying 
at  the  rate  of  a  million  every  few  years,  and  all  our  schools  are  get- 
ting hold  of  a  few  thousand  at  the  most."  His  face  lighted  up  with 
great  joy  and  hope,  and  he  said,  "When  you  see  the  first  streak  of 
dawn  in  the  east,  you  know  that  daylight  is  going  to  get  the  best  of 


488 

darkness."    And  it  is  in  that  spirit  that  we  go  back  to  our  work, — 
not  to  our  rest,  not  to  our  tea  party  merely,  but  to  our  work. 

Mr.  Jones. — This  has  been  an  interdenominational  program. 
Is  there  not  some  brother  from  across  the  seas  who  will  make  it  an 
international  symposium?  Let  us  have  a  voice  from  across  the 
Atlantic.    I  introduce  to  you  Rev.  Arthur  Heron,  of  London. 


REMARKS  OF  REV.  ARTHUR  HERON,  OF  LONDON. 

Mr.  Chairman,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — I  thought  it  unseemly  that 
I  should  sit  down  there  and  hear  no  voice  from  across  the  Atlantic, 
so  I  thought  perhaps  it  would  not  be  out  of  place  if  I  heard  my  own 
voice.  I  have  come  with  a  good  many  more,  and  have  had  a  wonder- 
ful experience  as  for  the  first  time  I  have  seen  this  great  continent 
and  this  great  city.  I  have  been  inspired  at  the  sight  of  this  coun- 
try, its  wonderful  natural  phenomena,  and  I  have  been  inspired  more 
by  the  sight  of  the  wonderful  way  in  which  this  great  people  have 
subdued  this  great  country  in  a  remarkably  short  space  of  time.  There 
is  all  the  vitality  in  the  American  people  which  I  had  imagined.  I 
shall  go  back  again  confirmed  in  the  view  that  I  had  from  reading  and 
from  interviews  with  other  men,  that  you  have  on  this  side  great 
forces,  great  vitality.  We  English,  I  believe,  are  getting  rid  of  our 
soreness  that  we  were  so  defeated  a  great  many  years  ago.  For  my  own 
part,  I  cannot  help  feeling  glad  for  it  continually.  I  am  not  at  all 
sorry  that  a  foolish  king  and  a  conceited  minister  were  set  aside  by  the 
men  of  Boston  and  the  New  England  States  many  years  ago,  because 
that  started  going  this  great  nation  which  has  such  a  wonderful  des- 
tiny before  it.  I  think  that  one  could  not  have  an  international  con- 
gress of  religion  in  a  better  place  than  in  this  new  country,  where, 
although  there  are  so  many  problems  and  so  much  that  one  has  to 
mourn  in  the  way  of  evil,  yet  there  are  also  so  many  signs  of  dawn, 
as  our  friend  has  said;  so  many  signs  that  men  are  giving  all  for 
the  sake  of  the  work  of  God  in  their  land,  and  are  determined 
to  keep  aloft  the  ideals  that  the  fathers  and  teachers  of  religion 
long  ago  set  forth  in  other  lands. 


489 

I  am  glad  that  I  am  able  to  be  here  this  afternoon  at  this  Depart- 
ment of  Religious  Fellowship,  because  I  believe  this  to  be  the  most 
important  of  all  branches  of  the  work  of  this  Congress.  As  I  under- 
stand it,  it  is  the  real  object  of  this  Congress  that  we  come  to  know 
one  another  better.  We  come  from  various  parts  of  the  world,  and 
are  placed  here  in  Boston  in  these  inspiring  buildings,  among  these 
inspiring  people,  that  we  may  commune  on  our  various  difficulties, 
on  our  various  problems,  and  give  one  another  our  various  ideas 
for  the  solution  of  our  problems. 

A  recent  speaker  said  that  we  had  not  across  the  water  perfect 
liberty.  I  think  there  are  many  of  us  on  the  other  side  who  have 
perfect  liberty,  and  who  would  deny  the  right  of  any  one  to  take  it 
away.  But  we  can  see  that  both  in  our  own  land  and  in  other  lands 
there  are  many  who  have  not  perfect  liberty.  It  may  be  that  you 
think  that  in  this  land  there  is  perfect  liberty,  but  I  feel  that  there  are 
many  signs  of  a  want  of  it,  in  religious  thought  and  in  other  ways. 
Men  are  not  enslaved,  perhaps,  by  government  and  by  churches  which 
have  all  the  influence  of  long  standing,  but  they  are  enslaved  by 
other  things.  They  are  enslaved  by  the  current  religion,  and  are 
not  able  to  escape  from  it.  I  have  seen  signs  even  here  in  Boston 
that  there  is  a  kind  of  slavery  to  Unitarianism  which  must  be 
escaped  from.  I  will  tell  you  what  I  mean,  and  I  say  this  in 
all  seriousness.  There  is  too  great  a  tendency  to  think  that  we 
are  the  people.  I  speak  as  a  Unitarian  and  as  one  in  sympathy 
to  the  full  with  Unitarians.  But  we  did  not  want  to  have  here 
a  Unitarian  Congress.  Your  American  title  for  the  Congress,  as  a 
Congress  of  Religious  Liberals,  was  a  grand  and  a  broad  one.  It  was 
one  that  really  stood  for  comity  and  for  fellowship.  But,  when  I 
read  my  program  here,  I  read  "A  Conference  on  Possibilities 
of  Closer  Co-operation  among  the  Organized  Christian  Fellowships 
represented  in  the  Congress."  Well,  I  had  hoped  that  the  idea  of 
the  members  meeting  here  might  be  rather  broader  than  that.  Why 
should  we  all  be  Christians  that  unite  to  do  the  work  that  we  want 
done  ?  There  are  in  this  conference  many  who  are  not  Christians, 
and  I  would  that  we  should  banish  from  our  program  these  sec- 
tarian terms  which  have  the  effect  of  excluding  many  from  the  con- 
ference whom  we  would  wish  to  see  here;  because  my  experience  is 
that  in  the  work  of  religion  there  are  many  in  the  world  to-day  who 


49° 

will  not  allow  themselves  to  be  called  Christians,  but  who  will  yet 
co-operate  with  all  that  is  best  in  the  work  of  Christians  or  of  Uni- 
tarians. What  is  it  that  we  want  ?  Do  we  want  men  to  agree  with 
us  in  our  thinking?  Then  let  us  turn  ourselves  into  a  society  for 
philosophic  argument,  and  let  us  convert  them  by  the  best  argu- 
ments which  we  can  bring  against  their  theses.  What  do  we  want? 
Do  we  desire  that  they  shall  all  share  our  views  ?  Then  we  must  go 
up  and  down  the  country  preaching  our  views  and  seeing  no  other 
views.  No,  we  desire  that  men  should  be  free  in  their  attitude  toward 
religion;  we  desire  that  they  should  apprehend  the  truth  which  makes 
free.  But  we  do  not  think  that  we  have  all  the  truth.  We  believe 
that  truth  is  very  broad,  much  broader  than  anything  that  we  have 
attained.  Why  not,  then,  unite  with  our  fellow -men,  not  on  this  plat- 
form of  a  common  Christian  belief,  but  of  a  common  religious  need, 
of  a  common  spiritual  aspiration,  and  banish  from  our  thoughts  and 
minds  the  idea  that  we  shall  get  men  to  agree  exactly  with  us  in  in- 
tellectual matters  or  that  we  have  attained  the  truth?  I  believe  that, 
when  we  take  this  idea  strongly,  we  may  have  this  union  of 
action  without  uniformity  of  thought.  Then  we  shall  go  forward 
in  our  battle  against  the  evils  that  are  in  the  world.  Why  is  it  that 
the  churches  are  to-day  so  comparatively  impotent  in  their  fight 
against  evil  ?  It  is  simply  because  they  place  so  much  stress  upon 
the  theological.  We  must  not  fall  into  that  danger.  We  must  unite 
to  place  the  stress  on  the  religious.  While  in  our  own  minds  we 
give  the  theological  its  right  emphasis,  yet  we  must  also  give  the 
religious  its  necessary  and  its  far  greater  emphasis.  And  then 
we  shall  get  men  of  all  shades  of  opinion,  who  are  earnest  in 
their  moral  aspirations,  to  unite  with  us  in  this  great  work  of  sav- 
ing the  world. 

Mr.  Jones. — I  think  you  would  like  to  have  me  ask  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Puddefoot,  Field  Secretary  of  the  Congregational  Home  Missionary 
Society,  to  say  a  word  before  we  part. 


49i 


REV.  W.  G.   PUDDEFOOT,  FIELD    SECRETARY,  CONGREGATIONAL   HOME 
MISSIONARY  SOCIETY. 

I  don't  think  you  are  orthodox  here,  for  the  Scripture  says,  "  Lay 
hold  suddenly  on  no  man,"  and  you  have  taken  hold  of  me  without 
warning.  I  am  in  hearty  sympathy  with  all  that  has  been  said, 
and  it  is  a  grand  thing  that  we  have  in  our  minds.  This  church  itself 
shows  a  good  deal  of  unity  in  diversity.  I  have  been  looking  at  your 
little  cherubs,  and  your  orthodox  stained  glass  windows,  and  your 
Apostles'  Creed,  which  I  don't  believe  the  apostles  ever  saw. 

It  is  pleasant  to  be  here,  and  find  this  spirit  of  unity.  I  went  to 
Philadelphia  a  little  while  ago  to  a  meeting  of  a  committee  on  which 
there  were  several  denominations  represented,  among  them  Congre- 
gationalists  and  Presbyterians  and  some  United  Brothers.  I  told 
them  that  if  I  could  get  unity  I  would  be  willing  to  be  called  a  United 
Sister.  What  do  I  care  for  the  name?  I  have  seen  a  church,  by 
virtue  of  necessity,  made  up  of  seventeen  denominations.  There 
were  not  enough  of  any  denomination  to  make  a  church,  so  they  were 
forced  to  unite.  I  was  at  the  dedication  of  that  church,  and  it  is  a 
marvellous  church.  If  we  could  only  get  people  to  unite  without 
forcing  them,  what  a  great  thing  it  would  be !  The  little  committee 
I  spoke  of  had  seven  denominations  represented  on  it,  and  there  were 
five  ministers  on  it.  One  of  them  told  me  he  was  a  Seventh-day 
Adventist.  Another  man  among  them  thought  that  the  two  tables 
of  stone  were  the  tables  that  the  apostles  talked  about  when  they  said 
they  could  not  serve  the  tables  because  they  were  free  of  the  law. 

I  was  glad  to  hear  my  brother  who  spoke  last, — my  countryman, 
although  I  came  here  thirty  years  before  he  did.  We  have  more 
freedom  to-day  in  England  than  you  have  in  the  United  States.  I 
don't  believe  I  could  speak  my  thoughts  so  freely  here  as  I  could  in 
Hyde  Park.  I  have  seen  the  time  when  a  man  might  talk  against 
the  king  and  kaiser,  and  I  would  like  to  have  seen  the  man  who 
would  have  dared  to  put  him  down. 

Some  one  has  said  that  there  are  tens  of  thousands  of  men  and 
women  who  stay  out  of  their  church  in  order  to  save  their  religion. 
There  is  truth  in  that. 

One  evening,  where  I  was  speaking,  a  young  woman  burst  into 


492 

tears,  and  said,  when  I  asked  her  what  was  the  matter,  "  Oh,  my,  I 
am  a  hypocrite,  Mr.  Puddefoot."  "I  don't  believe  it,"  I  said. 
"  Yes,  I  am.  I  belong  to  the  church,  and  I  don't  believe  half  of  its 
creed."  I  said,  "Good  for  you:  neither  do  I."  The  girl  was  para- 
lyzed.    It  was  a  new  idea  to  her. 

We  are  coming  to  learn  how  much  the  different  parts  of  the  com- 
munity depend  on  one  another.  If  the  Back  Bay  wants  a  clean  bill 
of  health,  she  must  look  after  the  North  End.  Didn't  we  lose  our 
beloved  governor,  Roger  Wolcott,  through  a  hundred  thousand 
microbes  coming  in  through  a  keyhole,  giving  him  typhoid  fever? 
Fifty  years  from  now,  if  a  man  dies  of  that  disease,  the  town  in 
which  it  occurs  will  be  disgraced. 

We  must  have  better  paid  men  on  the  frontier:  we  must  have  men 
that  can  stand  up  and  defend  their  position.  It  would  be  easy  enough 
to  hold  any  town  with  one  church  if  the  man  was  big  enough  for  it. 
The  trouble  is,  we  have  lots  of  fellows  with  little  brains,  who  are 
afraid  to  speak  out.  Thank  God,  I  have  never  been  troubled  that 
way !  When  God  says  a  thing  to  me,  say  it  I  must.  I  have  got  a  good 
deal  of  Quaker  in  me.  Some  of  us  damn  our  souls  by  keeping  back 
what  we  ought  to  burst  right  out  with,  and  let  it  go  and  cry  out,  and 
spare  not,  and  show  the  house  of  Israel  their  sins.  There  is  a  heap 
of  sin  among  you  Unitarians.  You  are  too  exclusive;  you  are  too 
polished.  You  don't  want  to  take  hold  of  disagreeable  things.  You 
help  the  poor:  you  love  them  if  they  keep  off  your  street. 

You  have  been  praying  for  an  open  door;  and  God  says,  "I  will 
open  it:  I  will  open  the  door  at  New  York  and  San  Francisco,  and 
there  is  your  opportunity."  And  it  seems  greater  than  you  can 
handle,  and  you  go  to  Congress  for  help.  Congress  cannot  help  you: 
each  one  has  got  to  help  the  other.  We  must  all  do  our  part.  And, 
oh,  what  a  lot  of  work  for  us  to  do,  you  Unitarians  especially!  You 
don't  seem  to  realize  that  in  this  land  of  free  schools  and  public 
libraries  men  and  women  are  growing,  and  they  are  growing  far  be- 
yond these  six  hundred  odd  folks  that  we  send  out  to  talk  to  them,  and 
the  consequence  is  we  cannot  reach  them.  You  have  a  mighty 
mission.  I  don't  care  how  many  converts  you  get,  if  you  get  a  man  to 
do  good.  I  don't  care  if  he  cannot  formulate  his  creed:  what  is 
the  odds  about  that  so  long  as  he  is  trying  to  live  a  righteous  life? 
He  will  have  something  to  do  with  everything  that  is  going  on  in  this 


493 

great  city;  not  stand  off  and  growl  about  it,  but  go  into  it.  I  want  to 
see  accomplished  what  has  been  done  in  New  Zealand :  I  want  to  see 
the  time  when  there  shall  not  be  a  millionaire  or  a  pauper.  I  want 
men  who  will  hear  Yahveh  speak,  and  prophesy.  That  is  what  I 
want  you  people  to  wake  up  and  do.  You  have  had  a  mighty  chance : 
you  have  not  taken  your  chance.  I  know  you  have  given  us  good 
literature,  but,  as  I  say,  your  books,  some  of  them,  are  pretty  old- 
fashioned.  Some  Unitarian  writers  are  back  numbers  to-day.  Of 
course,  Channing  will  never  be  a  back  number,  because  he  was  in  the 
front  when  he  started.  But  do  not  think  that  you  have  done  all  you 
can  when  you  have  distributed  books:  you  must  distribute  your- 
selves. Give  me  books, and  I  thank  you:  give  me  sympathy, and  I 
love  you. 

Mr.  Jones. — We  came  up  this  afternoon  to  find  out  what  we  were 
going  to  do  about  it.  The  brother  has  shown  us  what  we  are  going 
to  do  about  it:  there  is  no  obscurity  about  the  program  that  awaits 
us.  People  are  selfish  and  ignorant  and  mean,  and  there  is 
poverty,  indolence,  and  intemperance  all  about  us,  and  that  religion 
alone  is  religion  which  sets  itself  to  these  high  tasks  of  ameliorating 
the  woes  of  the  world,  of  laying  hold  of  the  miserable,  of  taking  the 
conceit  out  of  the  bumptious  and  putting  courage  into  the  dis- 
couraged people.  And  that  is  a  work  that  is  open  before  us  every- 
where and  all  the  time,  and,  if  this  Congress  is  to  realize  its  mission 
and  to  justify  itself,  it  will  enable  us  to  go  to  work,  and  not  be 
forever  harking  upon  our  history,  but  ever  pushing  forward  to  the 
high  task  of  making  history. 

Infinite  Father,  touch  us  with  a  new  purpose,  guide  us  into  new 
usefulness,  christen  us  again  in  the  spirit  of  helpfulness  which  is  the 
spirit  of  holiness,  and  Thy  will  abide  now  and  evermore.     Amen. 


494 


DEPARTMENT  OF  SOCIAL  AND    PUBLIC  SERVICE. 

Held  at  the  Old  South  Meeting-house  on  Wednesday  afternoon, 
September  25.     Chairman,  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  H.  Crooker: — 

Dr.  Crooker. — Friends,  this  building  is  one  of  the  shrines  of 
American  patriotism,  and  it  is  still  one  of  our  great  educational  in- 
stitutions, productive  of  the  very  highest  type  of  American  citizen- 
ship. This  is  one  of  our  ancient  meeting-houses,  closely  associated 
with  our  national  history.  In  its  very  shadow  Benjamin  Franklin 
was  born  over  two  centuries  ago,  and  there  are  many  interesting  and 
memorable  events  clustered  about  this  ancient  meeting-house. 
When  it  was  abandoned  some  thirty  years  ago  as  a  place  of  wor- 
ship by  the  congregation  over  which  Dr.  Gordon  so  graciously  and 
eloquently  presides,  it  became  a  centre  for  education  in  patriotism 
under  the  supervision  of  Edwin  D.  Mead. 

But  I  do  not  stand  here  this  afternoon  to  describe  this  ancient 
edifice  or  the  work  that  goes  forward  so  successfully  within  these 
walls.  We  have  met  to  consider  the  great  question  of  the  relation 
of  religion  to  social  life,  and  it  is  a  question  that  demands  our  best 
thought  and  our  best  feeling.  In  the  last  few  years  I  have  heard  a 
great  deal  about  the  religious  outlook.  Friends,  I  am  not  so  much 
interested  in  the  religious  outlook  as  I  am  in  the  religious  output. 
It  is  not  the  outlook  from  our  position,  but  what  are  we  ourselves 
putting  forth  into  the  world?  Not  our  prospect,  but  what  is  our 
product  ? 

I  have  heard  also  a  good  deal  about  the  Unitarian  opportunity 
and  the  liberal  opportunity.  But  there  is  another  point  on  which  I 
would  put  more  emphasis,  and  it  is  this:  the  Unitarian  obliga- 
tion, the  liberal  obligation:  what  we  owe  to  humanity,  not  our  selfish 
opportunity,  but  our  obligation,  holding  this  great  faith  in  trust. 

We  hear  the  plea,  and  with  interest  and  approval,  of  a  recon- 
structed and  enlarged  theology  that  shall  be  in  harmony  with  de- 
mocracy.   All  that  is  worthy;  but,  more  than  a  new  theology,  we  need 


495 

a  new  religion,  making  itself  felt  through  a  new  church,  remember- 
ing that  religion  is  something  more  than  a  private  conviction.  It 
is  a  life,  a  great  truth  that  many  of  us  liberals  have  forgotten;  and, 
as  liberals  stand  at  the  judgment  bar  of  the  world  to-day,  the  world 
is  asking,  "What  can  you  send  out  into  our  midst  in  the  line  of  moral 
regeneration,  in  the  line  of  spiritual  fervor,  in  the  line  of  organic 
effort,  for  the  uplifting  of  humanity  ?  "  We  are  going  to  be  judged  as 
a  religious  movement  by  our  contributions  to  the  spiritual  life  of 
humanity  and  the  social  amelioration  of  human  society. 

We  hear  to-day  a  great  deal  about  applied  Christianity.  I  would 
widen  the  term  and  speak  of  applied  religion, — the  necessity  of  hav- 
ing a  religion  that  can  be  applied  and  the  necessity  of  applying  the 
religion  that  we  have.  And  that  is  just  our  object  here  this  after- 
noon, to  consider  these  great  questions  that  link  themselves  to  the 
social  betterment  of  human  society  and  human  life;  and  it  is  with 
great  pleasure  that  we  have  with  us  one  who  has  won  a  large  place 
in  Great  Britain  by  his  eminent  services  along  these  lines.  We  will 
hear  from  Mr.  Maddison,  who  is  at  present  a  member  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  and  he  will  speak  to  us  upon  "Religious  and  Social 
Reform." 


RELIGIOUS  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM  BY  FRED  MADDISON,  M.P. 

Standing  in  the  Old  South  Church  of  Boston,  one  is  surrounded 
by  a  great  cloud  of  witnesses  to  the  vitality  of  religion  as  a  progressive 
force  in  the  affairs  of  men.  The  colony  of  Massachusetts  itself 
sprang  into  being  out  of  a  deep  and  abiding  religious  conviction 
shared  by  the  men  of  that  day,  and  the  same  spirit  animated  the 
great  founders  of  your  illustrious  republic.  The  Puritan  never 
divorced  his  religion  from  his  politics.  These  worthies  believed, 
with  William  Penn,  that  "a  man  should  make  it  a  part  of  his  religion 
to  see  that  his  country  is  well  governed." 

But  since  those  early  days  times  have  changed,  and  the  problems 
of  our  day  are  different.  They  were  formerly  largely  political:  they 
are  now  to  a  great  extent  economic.  Has,  then,  religion  in  our  gen- 
eration any  message  for  the  toiling  millions  in  mill  and  mine,  work- 
shop and  factory?  Religious  liberals  ought  to  have  no  difficulty 
in  answering  so  important  a  question  in  the  affirmative.     Our  faith 


496 

is  a  simple  one,  and  therefore  a  powerful  one.  We  believe  in  God, 
the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  in  the  divine  origin 
and  destiny  of  man,  and  in  the  oneness  and  the  persistence  of  the 
life  of  the  spirit  here  and  there,  in  this  world  and  in  all  worlds. 

We  have  no  anathemas  for  the  sincere  unbeliever,  and  we  ought 
to  have  no  apologies  for  the  wrong-doer,  whether  he  be  rich  or  poor. 
A  thief  is  not  made  honest  by  living  in  the  West  End  of  London  or 
on  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York,  not  even  if  he  runs  a  church  and  owns 
a  minister.  But  too  often  the  pulpit  thunders  violently  at  vice  in 
the  Bowery  or  Whitechapel  and  fawns  on  it  in  high  places. 

Friends,  you  have  got  to  make  your  minds  up.  You  cannot  retain 
your  influence  over  the  people  if  you  do  that.  Its  influence  is  de- 
pendent upon  its  discriminate  application  to  men  and  women  as 
such,  apart  from  their  standing  in  society.  But  I  submit  that  the 
function  of  the  religious  teacher  is  not  to  settle  for  us  details  of  pol- 
icy, not  to  tell  us  whether  we  should  be  Democrats  or  Republicans, 
Liberals  or  Tories.  We  can  manage  that  for  ourselves.  It  is  rather 
to  lay  down  great  basic  principles  of  human  conduct.  Religion 
begins  by  reminding  the  world  that  the  whole  human  family,  irrespec- 
tive of  race,  nationality,  or  color,  are  the  sons  and  daughters  of  God. 
But  in  my  view  this  Fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brotherhood  of 
man  does  not  in  any  way  commit  us  to  that  disordered  cosmopol- 
itanism which,  in  the  name  of  brotherhood,  treats  humanity  as 
though  it  lived  in  a  world  joss-house  instead  of  in  the  separate 
families  of  nations,  who  learn  to  love  other  families  and  so  bring 
about  a  real  international  fraternity. 

But  this  thought  of  the  Fatherhood  of  God  does  give  a  reality  to 
the  work  of  social  amelioration.  If  we  really  have  a  common  divine 
Father,  a  state  of  society  which  often  leaves  the  industrious  poor 
and  the  idle  rich  cannot  be  for  the  religious  man  the  last  word  of 
social  policy.  But  there  is  in  my  view  a  danger  here.  I  have  known 
followers  of  liberal  religion  so  touched  with  the  infirmities  of  their 
poorer  brethren,  and  so  sensitive  and  alive  to  the  evils  in  our  midst 
which  ought  to  be  remedied,  that  they  have  thought  proper  to  throw 
themselves  into  what  are  vaguely  enough  called  the  "Advance 
Movements,"  with  the  result  that  they  have  lost  their  position  as 
religious  teachers  and  have  not  been  thought  very  much  of  in  the 
ranks  to  which  they  have  gone. 


497 

Because  we  have  not  yet  abolished  poverty  from  our  midst  is  no 
reason  why  we  should  destroy  individual  possessions,  as  the  state 
socialist  is  seeking  to  do.  Communism,  as  Joseph  Mazzini,  the 
inspired  prophet  of  democracy,  more  than  half  a  century  ago  de- 
clared, might  bring  to  the  sons  of  men  a  system  which  would  prevent 
hunger,  but  it  would  be  the  life  of  the  beaver,  not  that  of  progressive 
man.  What  is  wanted  is  not  the  abolition  of  private  property,  with- 
out which  there  is  no  real  security  for  individual  liberty,  but  its  wider 
equitable  distribution.  This  surely  ought  to  appeal  to  all  professors 
of  all  religions.  Whilst  rejecting  the  materialistic  conception  of 
life,  they  realize  the  enormous  power  of  environment. 

Friends,  poverty  is  the  common  foe  of  progress.  It  limits  and 
sometimes  destroys  human  development,  and  you  get  the  same  re- 
sult by  an  excess  of  wealth  at  the  other  end  of  the  social  scale.  We 
want  neither  the  millionaire  nor  the  pauper.  Religion  claims  for  God 
and  mankind  the  fullest  and  most  complete  life,  physical,  mental, 
moral,  and  spiritual.  Religion  then  must  of  necessity  be  concerned 
with  all  the  agencies  which  go  to  bring  about  this  desired  result. 

Now,  necessarily,  the  brief  time  at  my  disposal  will  only  permit  a 
brief  reference  to  two  of  these  agencies;  namely,  Trades  Unionism 
and  Labor  Copartnership.  Of  the  first  there  is  an  enormous  amount 
of  misrepresentation  or  of  misunderstanding,  probably  a  little  of 
both.  The  ignorant  misunderstand  it,  and  the  interested  opponents 
misrepresent  it.  I  quite  agree  that  it  is  a  subject  on  which  we  are 
not  likely  to  get  anything  like  complete  agreement.  One  has  only 
to  mention  such  burning  topics,  well  known  to  you  here  in  America, 
as  the  open  shop,  the  black-list  of  employers  (which  of  course  they 
always  deny),  and  the  boycott  of  the  trades-union,  which  they  do 
not  deny,  in  order  to  raise  very  fierce  controversies. 

Here  it  might  be  not  amiss  to  just  give  a  figure  or  two  taken  from 
the  official  returns  of  the  trades-unions  of  England.  I  do  not  take 
these  figures  out  of  preference  for  my  own  country,  although  that 
preference  is  very  marked,  but  I  take  them  for  the  more  substantial 
reasons,  or,  rather,  two  reasons,  that,  first  of  all,  England  is  the 
home  of  organized  labor,  the  beginning  of  organized  labor,  and  we 
have  a  larger  proportion  of  it  to  the  population  than  any  other  great 
country  in  the  world;  and,  secondly  our  trades-unions  have  got  to 
the  mature  stage  where  alone  we  can  judge  any  institution.     I  merely 


498 

quote  a  figure  or  two  to  disabuse  the  minds  of  any  who  imagine  that, 
when  organized  labor  does  reach  the  settled  stage,  it  is  not  the  kind 
of  thing  which  certain  people  seem  to  think  it  is. 

Now,  taking  the  last  ten  years  published,  the  average  annual 
expenditure  of  English  trades-unions  was  ^1,605,000, — not  dollars. 
Of  this  amount  the  average  expenditure  on  strikes  and  lockouts, 
all  disputes,  was  only  £234,000.  In  other  words,  for  every  £100 
spent  per  year,  less  than  £15  went  to  industrial  disputes,  showing 
that  we  in  England,  at  any  rate,  are  not  by  any  means  in  love  with 
the  strike  as  a  weapon  which  we  like  to  use  frequently. 

But,  friends,  my  appeal  for  a  favorable  consideration  for  trades- 
unionism  is  confined  to  the  vital  principle  of  organized  labor, — col- 
lective bargaining.  If  you  take  this  away,  nothing  is  left;  but,  if 
you  let  it  remain,  all  the  excesses — and  there  are  many,  which  all 
good  men  deplore — are  no  necessary  part  of  it.  Now  what  is  col- 
lective bargaining?  Why,  simply  a  means  whereby  the  units  of 
labor  may  bargain  on  something  like  equal  terms  with  concentrated 
and  organized  capital  through  the  chosen  spokesmen  of  the  work- 
men. Surely,  friends,  this  is  an  insistence  upon  the  essential  con- 
ditions of  buying  and  selling.  Our  laws,  and  probably  yours,  con- 
stantly speak  of  a  free  purchase  made  by  a  free  buyer  of  a  free  seller, 
and  collective  bargaining  only  seeks  to  secure  that  desirable  end. 
It  has  proved  to  be  the  only  way  in  which  in  these  days  of  financial 
corporations  (of  which  you  know,  I  am  glad  to  say,  far  more  than 
we  do)  this  can  be  done.  In  the  absence  of  this  collective  bargain- 
ing, I  venture  to  say,  there  can  be  no  freedom  for  the  ordinary  work- 
man; and  nothing  is  more  sickening  to  me — and  some  of  its  worst 
echoes  have  come  from  Boston — than  to  hear  non-unionism  advo- 
cated in  the  name  of  liberty.  Liberty  has  many  such  incidents  to 
record,  and  none  worse  than  this. 

Organized  labor  has  its  faults,  as  every  other  human  institution 
has,  including  the  Church  and  including  the  liberal  churches,  and  I 
confess  and  admit  that  it  does  at  times  act  contrary  to  the  common 
weal;  and,  whenever  it  does,  though  I  am  a  trades-unionist  myself, 
it  must  be  dealt  with  impartially  and  sternly.  But  I  am  here  to  say 
that  its  net  results  have  been  good.  It  has  enabled  men  to  be  in- 
dustrial freemen  instead  of  the  mere  slaves  of  capital. 

But,  friends,  I  do  not  claim  your  favorable  consideration  for  organ- 


499 

ized  labor  merely  on  this  ground,  though  I  think  it  is  strong.  Every 
man  and  woman  in  this  room  and  every  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
whatever  may  be  their  politics,  is  alive  to  the  dangers  of  industrial 
strife  and  conflict,  even  when  they  are  not  accompanied  by  some  of 
those  wild  scenes  which  occasionally  occur  in  your  country  as  well  as 
in  our  own.  In  the  interests  of  the  republic  and  of  the  common- 
wealth and  the  community  it  is  most  undesirable  that  a  state  of  war 
from  time  to  time  should  exist  in  our  midst,  a  war  which  on  the  one 
side  reduces  the  bank  balance  of  the  rich  capitalist  and  on  the  other 
brings  starvation  to  women  and  children.  Therefore,  every  religious 
person  must  be  in  favor  of  industrial  peace.  But,  friends,  it  is  no 
use  indulging  in  meaningless  phrases  about  "industrial  peace." 
The  man  who  wants  industrial  peace  and  is  opposed  to  trades-union- 
ism is  either  not  honest  or  has  no  knowledge.  There  can  be  no 
industrial  peace  unless  both  sides  are  organized  and  are  able  to  put 
forward  their  accredited  representatives.  Without  organization  you 
must  have  chaos  and  anarchy.  Do  you  not  believe,  in  this  republic  of 
yours,  with  those  great  public  schools  which  I  am  always  as  ready  to 
salute  as  your  flag,  which  are  the  admiration  of  us  Englishmen, — do 
you  not  believe,  if  you  had  no  trades  unionism,  that  you  would  have 
great  masses  of  men  moved  and  manoeuvred  and  controlled  by  your 
great  trusts  and  your  corporations  just  as  they  think  fit?  Trades- 
unionism  is  the  pathway  of  industrial  peace. 

Friends,  in  the  very  short  time  that  remains  to  me  I  want  to  allude 
to  the  second  agency  to  which  I  referred;  namely,  the  Labor  Co- 
partnership Societies.  Now  I  cannot  stop  to  explain  this  except 
just  to  say  in  a  sentence  that  it  is  an  attempt  to  incorporate  into 
industry  the  principle  of  participation  on  the  part  of  the  workshop 
in  capital  and  profits  and  management.  Already  in  England  some 
advance  has  been  made  in  this  direction.  Last  year  workmen's  so- 
cieties— purely  workmen's  societies — conducted  on  these  lines  had 
an  output  of  $6,000,000  and  an  invested  capital  of  over  $3,700,000. 
Over  and  above  the  trades-union  rate  of  wages,  which  all  of  them 
paid,  they  divided  during  the  year  $36,000  to  those  employed  in 
these  workmen's  societies.  This  is  an  effort  to  bring  democracy, 
about  which  we  hear  a  great  deal,  often  more  than  we  realize,  into 
industry.  Your  Horace  Greeley,  whose  name  is  just  as  familiar 
on  our  side  as  yours,  used  these  words  many  years  ago.    He  said: — 


5°° 

"Co-operation  is  the  true  goal  of  our  industrial  progress,  the  ap- 
plication of  the  republican  principle  to  labor,  and  the  appointed 
means  of  rescuing  the  working  class  from  dependence,  dissipation, 
prodigality  and  need,  and  establishing  it  on  a  basis  of  forecast,  cal- 
culation, sobriety,  and  thrift,  conducive  at  once  to  its  material  com- 
fort, its  intellectual  culture,  and  moral  elevation." 

Those,  friends,  are  wise  words,  and  they  have  long  represented 
my  conviction.  I  submit  that  this  is  the  antidote  to  the  virus  of 
both  aggressive  capitalism  and  destructive  socialism. 

But,  friends,  in  conclusion,  to  us  who  belong  to  the  liberal  religious 
faith,  nay,  to  all  religious  people,  it  must  be  clear — and  I  would  that 
it  were  as  clear  to  the  men  who  are  in  outside  labor  and  political 
movements — that  the  social  problem  is  more  than  political  and 
economic.  It  is  human,  it  is  moral.  You  can  read  the  volumes  of 
our  political  economists,  and  they  tell  you  all  that  is  necessary  to 
know  about  every  phase  of  the  economic  question;  but  one  thing 
so  many  of  them  seem  to  omit  is  that  the  systems  which  they  are 
advocating  have  to  be  applied  by  and  to  human  beings,  not  to  pieces 
of  mechanism,  without  hearts  and  heads  and  feelings  and  emotions. 
It  is  not  merely  what  laws  or  industrial  systems  do  or  may  do,  but 
it  is  what  the  individual  is  and  what  he  does  which  makes  so  much 
difference. 

I  remember,  when  I  was  in  the  House  of  Commons  seven  years 
ago,  sitting  on  the  bench  by  the  side  of  Mr.  John  Burns,  one  of  the 
ablest  and  best  workmen  that  we  have  in  England,  while  some  par- 
ticular thing  which  I  forget  now  was  under  discussion.  Turning  to 
me,  he  said,  "Maddison,  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  a  bad 
system  run  by  good  men  will  give  a  better  result  than  a  good  system 
run  by  bad  men." 

This,  then,  is  at  once  our  call  to  work  and  our  responsibility  and 
our  great  advantage, — we  who  believe  in  religion.  Religion  is  the 
one  great  personal  force  in  the  world:  it  is  personal  work,  its  key- 
note is  duty.  Under  its  influence  citizenship  and  office  become  a 
sacred  trust,  not  a  means  of  graft.  It  is  not  what  we  can  get  out  of 
public  life,  but  what  we  can  put  into  it.  Money-making  cannot  be 
separated  in  the  minds  of  religious  men  from  honesty  and  equity. 
Religion  comes  right  home  to  the  man  himself,  not  to  the  manager 
of  his  store  or  the  foreman  in  his  shop  or  his  political  boss,  but  to 


PROF.  H.  U.  MEYBOOM,  D.D. 
Groningen,  Holland 


REV.  PHILIP  H.  HUGENHOLTZ,  Jr.,  D.D. 
Amsterdam,  Holland 


PROF.  H.  Y.  GROENEWEGEN,  DJ). 

Leiden,  Holland 


REV.  F.  C.  FLEISCHER 

Makkum,  Holland 


*tJBKAH  £ 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 

t£4LIFORN.V^ 


5o* 

him.  The  great  message  of  religion  is  to  him,  to  his  conscience 
and  to  his  heart.  And,  if  I  could  influence  one  of  you  workers  in 
the  field  of  social  reform  who  are  outside  the  churches,  and,  what 
is  far  more  important,  outside  of  religion,  I  would  just  say  to  you 
that  in  your  turmoil,  in  your  strife, — and  there  is  both  in  these  move- 
ments,— it  is  useless  to  concentrate  all  the  vices  in  the  capitalist. 
There  is  not  a  single  vice  that  they  possess  that  we  do  not  have  in 
the  labor  movement,  and  I  also  think  we  can  claim  to  have  their 
virtues,  without  hurting  ourselves. 

It  is  this,  then,  that  is  the  great  and  paramount  value  of  religion 
to  social  reformers,  that  it  comes  to  men  and  women  appealing 
directly  to  them.  Jesus  did  not  talk  of  rights,  but  of  sacrifice,  of 
love,  of  duty;  and  the  great  office  of  religion,  one  that  the  great  reform 
movements  yearn  and  pant  for,  is  to  stimulate  the  sense  of  duty  in 
all  people  of  all  classes.  Friends,  society  will  be  regenerated  just 
in  proportion  as  each  of  us  do  our  duty  to  one  another  in  the  spirit 
of  religion.  I  verily  believe  that  he  who  is  most  possessed  by  the 
thought  of  God  is  best  fitted  for  the  service  of  man. 

The  Chairman  then  introduced  Rev.  Leonhard  Ragaz,  of  Basel, 
Switzerland,  who  spoke  on  "The  Ethical  Basis  of  Liberal  Chris- 
tianity." 


502 


THE   ETHICAL  BASIS   OF  LIBERAL 
CHRISTIANITY. 

BY  REV.  LEONHARD  RAGAZ,  OF  BASEL,  SWITZERLAND. 

No  doubt  you  all  know  that  remarkable  little  book  in  which  the 
Japanese,  Kanso  Utchimura,  tells  us  how  he  became  a  Christian. 
It  ranks,  in  my  opinion,  among  the  best  defences  of  Christianity 
that  have  ever  been  written.  One  of  the  most  impressive  passages 
in  this  work  is  that  in  which  he  depicts  for  us  the  tense  feeling  with 
which  he  first  trod  the  soil  of  a  Christian  land, — his  eager  expecta- 
tion of  finding  at  once  the  Divine  City  of  the  book  of  Revelation, 
a  humanity  after  the  pattern  of  Jesus  Christ,  full  of  purity  and 
brotherly  love  and  of  sunshine  from  God  the  Father, — and,  then, 
the  depth  of  his  disappointment.  The  fact  that  this  Christian  land 
happened  to  be  North  America  is  beside  the  point.  Similar  experi- 
ences, or  even  worse,  would  have  met  him  in  any  other  so-called 
Christian  land.  And  in  this  same  country  of  North  America  he 
afterwards  witnessed  other  scenes  which  cogently  convinced  him  of 
the  superiority  of  the  Christian  faith.  What  makes  this  witness 
for  and  against  Christianity  so  important  is  the  fact  that  here  we 
have,  for  once,  a  Christian — a  highly  cultured,  earnest,  and  profound 
Christian — scanning  this  self-styled  Christian  world  with  unsophis- 
ticated eyes,  and  so  perceiving  in  all  its  naked  clearness  that  sorry 
miracle  which  we  can  never  see  so  well  because  our  eyes  are  accus- 
tomed to  it,  and  we  take  it  all  for  granted.  I  mean  the  contrast 
between  the  demands  and  promises  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  and  the 
Christianity  of  actual  experience.  To  one  who  knows  his  Chris- 
tianity chiefly  through  the  New  Testament  it  must  present,  indeed, 
an  incredible  spectacle:  a  world  in  whose  name  the  bells  call  day 
and  night  from  the  church  tower,  confessing  "peace  on  earth," 
while  it  looks  upon  the  founding  of  more  and  more  big  guns,  of 
more  and  more  powerful  calibre,  as  one  of  its  most  important  tasks; 


5°3 

a  world  in  which  the  brotherhood  of  all  mankind  is  proclaimed  at 
least  on  Sundays,  while  racial  hatred  and  national  arrogance  seem 
continually  to  increase;  a  world  in  which  we  are  proud  of  our  knowl- 
edge of  the  true  God,  while  not  only  does  Mammon  boast  greater 
temples  and  more  passionate  worship,  but  even  vice  assumes  more 
frightful  forms  than  among  races  which  are  still  pagan;  a  world 
in  which  there  stands,  in  churches  and  at  the  crossways,  the  image 
of  him  who  in  his  suffering  and  death  revealed  and  sealed  the  truth 
of  ministering  love,  and  in  which  at  the  same  time  even  divines, 
who  are  especially  and  peculiarly  called  to  the  preaching  of  this 
cross,  are  proclaiming,  in  the  name  of  practical  politics,  the  principle 
of  force  as  the  will  of  God.  Perhaps  this  is,  after  all,  the  problem 
of  problems  for  our  religious  thought,  as  well  as  for  our  practice, — 
this  apparent  ethical  sterility  of  Christendom.  The  ethical  longings 
and  searchings  of  the  present  time  bring  this  problem  nearer  home 
to  us  than  ever,  make  it  a  question  of  life  and  death.  The  oppo- 
nents of  Christianity,  the  Positivists,  Monists,  free  thinkers  of  every 
type,  are  living  on  the  taunt  which  they  can  fling  at  us:  Your  Chris- 
tianity has  had  two  thousand  years  in  which  to  show  whether  it  is 
able  to  transform  the  world.  Has  it  transformed  the  world?  And 
where  do  we  find,  in  ordinary  moral  practice,  the  difference  between 
those  who  are  Christians  and  those  who  are  not  ? 

In  this  general  charge  of  moral  sterility  there  are  two  counts 
which  stand  out  especially, — that  Christianity  is  simply  a  force  of 
reaction  and  that  as  a  source  of  untruthfulness  it  is  without  peer. 
In  fact,  this  is  the  very  culmination  of  that  sorry  miracle  about  which 
we  were  speaking:  that  the  gospel  of  Jesus,  the  most  revolutionary 
radicalism  that  the  world  ever  saw,  has  always,  through  the  length 
and  breadth  of  Christian  history,  been  allied  with  the  established 
powers  of  the  world,  has  figured,  indeed,  as  their  passionate  defender 
and  advocate;  that  he  who  is  the  Truth,  he  who  bled  and  died  in 
battle  for  the  truth,  has  become  a  terror  to  the  sincere;  that  he  whose 
most  fitting  name  is  "Liberator"  has  become  the  most  cruel  yoke 
of  the  spiritual  world. 

It  is,  I  repeat,  the  question  of  questions  for  the  religious  thought 
and  activity  of  the  present  day  that  we  should  probe  this  evil  mys- 
tery, and,  so  far  as  in  us  lies,  banish  it  from  the  world.  How  are 
we  to  explain  it  ?    What  is  the  cause  of  that  moral  sterility  of  a  great 


5°4 

part  of  our  Christian  life, — a  sterility  which  as  honorable  men  and 
women  we  cannot  deny  ?  Is  it,  forsooth,  the  gigantic  power  of  evil, 
the  natural  depravity  of  the  world,  the  selfishness  and  weakness  of 
human  nature  ?  Or  is  it  merely  that  Christianity  means  to  countless 
numbers  of  people  no  more  than  a  confession  of  the  lips,  and  not  a 
living,  spiritual  reality?  These  are  certainly  factors  whose  impor- 
tance we  are  not  inclined  to  forget.  But  they  do  not  bring  us  to  the 
heart  of  the  problem.  The  real  strangeness  of  the  matter  is  not 
that  the  world  resists  the  gospel,  but  that  the  gospel  leaves  the  world 
so  much  in  peace;  not  that  the  lukewarm  or  even  hypocritical  Chris- 
tians are  in  the  majority,  but  that  there  are  profoundly  earnest 
Christians  who,  nevertheless,  fail  to  bear  the  fruits  of  the  gospel 
and  to  become  the  salt  of  the  earth.  Where  is  the  explanation  to 
be  found  ? 

The  short  time  which  stands  at  my  disposal  will  not  allow  me  to 
do  more  than  make  a  few  suggestions  with  reference  to  a  theme 
which  volumes  could  not  exhaust.  Let  me  then  condense  what  I 
have  to  say  briefly  as  follows:  the  fruit  of  the  gospel  has  been  ruined 
mainly  because  the  gospel  itself  has  been  changed.  For  the  relation 
between  God  and  man  which  was  revealed  in  Jesus  something  of 
quite  a  different  kind  has,  to  a  large  extent,  been  substituted  in 
Christianity.  I  will  at  once  lay  stress  on  the  two  main  points. 
The  internal  authority  has  been  displaced  by  the  external.  In  place 
of  the  living  God  whom  Jesus  proclaimed,  who  reveals  himself 
directly  to  souls  that  seek  him,  and  is  apprehended  in  moral 
obedience  and  unforced  love,  other  things  have  intruded, — dogma, 
the  church,  the  Bible,  the  formulated  confession.  The  second 
matter,  however,  is  a  change  in  the  conception  of  faith.  That  free 
trust  in  God's  power  and  love  which  appeared  in  Jesus,  the  trust 
which  pours  itself  forth  joyfully  in  the  doing  of  God's  will,  has  been 
displaced  by  assent  to  the  church  or  the  religious  system,  especially 
to  the  dogma  of  vicarious  propitiation  by  the  God-man.  The  fol- 
lowing of  Christ  has  been  thrust  out  in  favor  of  Christology.  To 
•express  both  changes  in  one  sentence,  the  relation  between  God  and 
man  has  been  removed  from  within  to  without,  has  been  changed 
from  a  direct  and  immediate  to  a  mediated  relation. 

Orthodoxy, — this  it  is  that  rests  on  external  authority.      Only 
.a  very  superficial  rationalism  could  ignore  what  the  forms  of  piety 


5°5 

which  bear  the  stamp  of  orthodoxy  have  done  for  the  world.  Far 
from  us  be  any  such  injustice.  But  we  must  not  on  that  account 
be  blind  to  the  evil  side  of  this  development.  The  displacement 
of  a  free,  internal,  living  authority  by  a  legalistically  rigid  and 
external  authority  has  been,  indeed,  the  dreadful  source  of  that 
spiritual  repression  and  of  that  hypocrisy  which  is  poisoning  the 
world.  The  false  conception  of  faith  makes  quite  clear  to  us  how 
men  can  embrace  with  ardor  the  cross  of  Jesus  and  yet  indiffer- 
ently pass  by  the  brother  for  whom  Jesus  died, — yes,  even  hate 
those  that  do  not  acknowledge  their  own  religious  system.  It  ex- 
plains how  passionate  zeal  for  a  religious  system  may  coexist  with 
conduct  which  does  not  even  reach  the  average  moral  standard 
of  the  higher  paganism.  The  ethical  centre  of  the  gospel  has  been 
shifted,  and  on  the  ground  thus  gained  the  most  terrible  enemy  of 
the  gospel  has  planted  itself  rankly, — religious  selfishness,  which 
seeks  to  make  use  of  God  for  its  own  ends,  to  gain  advantage  from 
him,  and  is  all  the  more  zealously  alert  to  play  the  courtier  to  God 
with  confessions  and  forms  of  worship,  the  less  earnestly  it  is  set 
on  doing  his  will. 

At  this  point  it  becomes  luminously  clear  what  ought,  in  accord- 
ance with  God's  plan,  to  be  accomplished  by  an  unorthodox  or 
liberal  theology.  Let  me  exhibit  this  once  more  by  taking  our  his- 
torical bearings.  The  free  theology  which  we  acknowledge  took 
its  rise  in  the  ethical  idealism  of  the  German  and  Anglo-American 
philosophy  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries.  The  names 
of  Lessing,  Herder,  Kant,  Schleiermacher,  Hegel,  Schiller,  too,  and 
Goethe,  as  well  as  Coleridge,  Carlyle,  Martineau,  Emerson,  and 
their  spiritual  family,  name  also  the  springs  of  a  new  religious  thought. 
At  the  centre  of  this  new  thinking  stands  the  principle,  Nothing  is 
true  except  that  which  our  own  individual  spirit  recognizes  and  attests. 
What  is  imposed  upon  me  from  without,  or  what  I  compel  myself 
to  accept,  is,  for  me,  not  true.  It  is  an  outrage  on  the  moral  per- 
sonality, and,  therefore,  on  morality  itself.  For  this  alone  is  morality, 
— to  obey  the  law  of  our  own  inner  being,  in  the  intuitive  expectation 
that  therein  the  holy  world  of  goodness  will  become  manifest.  These 
two  words,  "Freedom"  (autonomy)  and  "Personality,"  are  the 
fountains  of  a  new  spiritual  world.  To  show  that  this  is  so,  I  need 
but  utter  the  two  names  Kant  and  Emerson. 


T5o6 

We  stand  here  before  a  moral  new  creation,  the  range  of  which 
our  sight  is  hardly  yet  able  to  measure,  before  a  new  ethical  reve- 
lation, a  new  unfolding  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  from  this, 
too,  that  the  new  theology  derives  its  best-grounded  right.  It  is 
not  a  child  of  fashion,  of  half  belief  or  of  rationalistic  illuminism, 
but  the  eldest  born  of  that  idealistic  ethic  which  has  its  centre  in 
veracity.  What  is  being  accomplished  is  a  mighty  revolution — 
theoretical,  indeed,  but  already  becoming  practical,  and  destined  to 
become  so  more  and  more — in  man's  relation  to  the  highest  reality. 
The  place  of  the  external  authority  is  again  being  taken  by  the  inter- 
nal, and  that  of  church,  dogma,  and  Bible  by  the  God  who  attests 
himself  in  the  present.  This  does  not  mean  that  the  revelation  of 
history  has  been  cast  aside  or  assigned  a  lower  value  than  before. 
On  the  contrary,  the  more  we  enter  in  our  own  lives  into  the  experi- 
ence of  what  revelation  really  is,  the  more  thirstily  do  we  seek  for 
it  in  the  divine  history  of  the  past;  but  it  is  not  revelation  for  us 
until  we  experience  it  as  such.  The  whole  religious  world  of  thought, 
as  it  has  hitherto  existed,  is  being  recast  in  the  fire  of  this  new  relig- 
ious knowledge,  that  it  may  reveal  its  worth  in  new  splendor.  The 
new  theology  does  not  simply  deny  the  old  dogma  in  order  to  fashion 
a  new  one.  That  would  soon  result  in  a  new  orthodoxy.  It  gives 
the  old  truths  a  new  determinant,  a  new  sense.  Revelation,  Bible, 
redemption  through  Christ,  the  cross  of  Jesus, — all  this  retains  its 
truth,  is  even  truer  than  before;  but  instead  of  a  mere  external 
event  it  must  all  become  a  vital  experience,  a  part  of  the  soul.  The 
moral  personality  in  its  truthfulness  becomes  the  sole  mediator  between 
God  and  man,  and  in  this  way  we  reach  the  moral  basis  of  the  gospel 
of  Jesus. 

With  this  spring  freshly  opened  and  purified,  is  it  possible  that 
there  should  be  no  renewal  of  the  ethical  might  of  the  gospel  ?  When 
the  inner  authority  is  once  more  proclaimed  as  the  highest  court  in 
religious  matters,  and  moral  truthfulness  made  the  centre  of  life,  the 
axe  is  laid  to  the  poisonous  tree  of  Christian  untruthfulness  of  which 
we  have  spoken.  If  faith  becomes  again  the  most  personal  concern 
of  man,  it  cannot  but  bear  fruit,  for  that  which  is  alive  bears  fruit. 
There  is  no  other  way  to  God  than  that  which  leads  through  the  centre 
of  personality.  This  is  assured  by  two  great  facts  of  our  time: 
first,  the  general  collapse  of  religious  tradition;  second  and  especially, 


5°7 

the  criticism  of  the  Bible.  So  far  as  this  criticism  is  concerned,  it 
flows,  as  a  necessary  consequence  from  the  basal  ethical  principle 
of  the  new  age  and  the  new  theology,  that  we  must  recognize  nothing 
as  truth  but  that  which  attests  itself  to  our  own  mind  and  soul. 
The  root,  then,  of  the  much-abused  modern  criticism  is  not  unbe- 
lief, but  the  pressure  of  religious  veracity,  the  longing  to  bestow 
reverence  not  on  shadows,  but  realities,  to  serve  no  imaginary  good, 
but  the  God  that  is.  It  is  through  this  cause  that  criticism,  often 
without  its  own  knowledge  and  even  against  its  own  will,  has  been 
a  tool  to  open  that  mighty  fountain  of  life,  the  original  gospel.  It 
has  destroyed  much  on  which  we  used  to  lean,  and  has  often  terrified 
us  mortally.  It  has  torn  away  not  only  ruins  and  rubbish,  but  also 
the  ivy  which  we  had  grown  so  fond  of;  but  at  last  it  has  laid  bare 
the  rock  on  which  alone  the  soul  of  modern  man  can  rest  now  that 
other  props  have  been  taken  from  him,  but  on  which  he  can  rest  in 
safety, — the  witness  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God's  truth;  and  in  every 
soul  which  seeks  him  with  deep  and  earnest  moral  concentration 
that  witness  is  heard. 

It  is  upon  the  knowledge  of  such  foundations  and  results  that  the 
free  theology  stands.  Its  principle  is  the  free,  living,  and  quickening 
revelation  of  the  living  God.  This  sounds  like  arrogance,  but  it 
is  not  arrogance.  For  we  are  not  thinking  now  of  parties  or  systems, 
but  of  the  new  unfolding  of  his  truth  which  God  in  his  grace  has 
bestowed  upon  us  all.  It  is  only  that  the  new  theology  has,  with 
especial  determination,  made  this  the  basis  of  its  thought.  We  are 
dealing  with  a  new  disclosure  of  the  truth  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
premonitions  of  which  are  to  be  found,  more  or  less,  in  all  parties 
and  churches.  This  is  clearly  God's  way  in  the  religious  crisis  of 
our  time,  that  the  ethical  nature  and  power  of  the  gospel  should  reveal 
itself  afresh  to  the  world.  This  world  pays  but  little  attention  to 
churches  and  dogmas,  but  it  begins  to  listen  at  once  so  soon  as  the 
talk  is  of  righteousness,  purity,  brotherhood.  From  materialism, 
naturalism,  the  pleasures  and  pains  of  civilization,  it  lifts  eyes  of 
longing  to  the  heights.  The  modern  view  of  the  world,  fashioned 
by  natural  and  historical  science,  has  robbed  the  world  of  God;  but 
it  finds  him  again  in  ethical  yearning.  There  lives  in  the  world's 
heart  a  stronger  hope  than  it  has  ever  felt  since  the  early  days  of 
Christianity, — the  hope  for  a  transformation  of  its  whole  being  that 


5°8 

shall  make  for  righteousness  and  joy.  But  this  brings  it  at  once 
to  Jesus.  It  learns  with  astonishment  that  he  is  the  appointed 
guide  for  all  this  seeking  and  yearning.  For  what  was  his  aim  but 
this  kingdom  of  God  and  man,  which  is  to  give  unity  for  disruption, 
solidarity  for  the  strife  of  all  against  all,  service  for  the  rule  of  might, 
and  thus  to  set  up  a  new  order  of  things  through  light  and  life  from 
the  Father?  It  often  seems  to  me  that  we  are  only  beginning  to 
understand  Jesus.  Far  from  having  been  overtaken  and  left  behind, 
he  stands  far  ahead  of  us  and  high  above  us.  It  is  only  by  going 
forward  that  we  can  learn  to  understand  him.  The  God-man  of 
dogma  has  disappeared.  But  that  which  has  taken  his  place  seems 
to  us  greater,  the  divine  man, — that  one  compact  miracle  of  this 
life  beside  which  all  dogmatic  miracles  fade  into  nothingness, — his 
freedom  and  boldness,  his  trust,  his  love,  his  childlike  simplicity 
united  with  inflexible  heroism,  his  parables,  his  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  his  cross,  and  (grandest  of  all)  the  voice  which  calls  to 
us  from  all  these  miracles  does  not  cry,  "Believe  on  me,"  but  "Follow 
me." 

In  the  service  of  this  great  new  thing  which  God  intends  to  give 
us  the  new  theology  must  enroll  itself,  well  knowing  how  modest  a 
part  any  theology  must  play,  whatever  be  its  name,  and  that  the  worth 
of  a  theology  is  exactly  measured  by  its  understanding  of  God's 
progressive  work  of  creation.  In  this  service  it  may  cherish  the  con- 
sciousness of  carrying  on  great  traditions.  When  the  Reformation, 
after  mighty  beginnings,  was  again  inclining  in  many  respects 
towards  Catholicism,  those  radical  spirits  had  already  appeared 
in  whom  those  thoughts  lived  which  move  us  to-day, — I  mean  the 
Baptists.  Against  letter-worship  they  set  the  principle  of  the  spirit, 
against  tradition  the  "inner  light,"  against  church  establishment 
by  the  State  the  brotherly  unity  of  like-minded  disciples  of  Jesus, 
against  an  inert  Christianity  of  dogma  the  following  of  Christ.  The 
ethical-social  promises  and  demands  of  the  gospel,  its  subjectivism 
and  its  brotherhood,  its  world-transforming  radicalism,  its  message 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  had  worked  so  marvellously  upon  these  men 
that  they  were  intoxicated  with  them.  Repressed  on  the  Continent, 
their  spirit  flamed  up  in  the  Puritanism  of  England,  especially  in 
Quakerism,  streamed  over  to  the  New  World,  which  it  made  into 
a  world  of  freedom,  and  then  returned  with  renovating  power  to 


5°9 

Europe.  It  can  be  shown  that  a  great  part  of  that  possession  which 
the  modern  world  calls  its  own,  especially  all  that  is  bound  up  with 
freedom,  has  grown  up  beside  this  stream.  The  soil  on  which  we 
are  here  gathered  with  thankfulness  and  pride  has  been  blessed  by 
it  with  ethical  fruitfulness.  A  Channing,  a  Parker,  an  Emerson, 
have  here  gloriously  embodied,  each  in  his  own  several  way,  the 
ethical  power  of  the  gospel.  Standing  upon  this  ground,  we  look 
forward  with  joy  to  a  future  in  which  Jesus'  message  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  shall  complete  its  work,  unfolding  in  ever  more  glorious 
shapes,  to  make  the  world  free  in  the  name  of  God. 

The  Chairman  introduced  next  Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant,  of  London, 
whose  paper  was  on  "The  World  War  against  Intoxicants." 


5"> 


THE  WORLD  WAR  WITH  INTOXICANTS. 

BY  THE  REV.  W.  G.  TARRANT,  B.A.,  LONDON,  ENGLAND. 

The  Church  which  shall  be  "equal  to  the  needs  of  man"  will  not 
ignore  one  of  the  most  urgent  of  those  needs;  namely,  the  need  of 
deliverance  from  and  protection  against  intoxicants.  Alcoholic 
drink  has  been  declared  by  high  authorities  to  be  the  most  destruc- 
tive material  enemy  of  the  human  race.  If  this  declaration  comes 
within  measurable  distance  of  justification,  what  body  of  religious 
people  can  hold  aloof  from  the  warfare  it  implies?  While  philoso- 
phers discuss  nice  points  of  speculation,  while  erudite  students 
dexterously  reconstitute  the  past  and  dreamers  forecast  the  future, 
the  problem  of  how  to  conquer  intoxicants  cries  out  for  the  imme- 
diate attention  of  all  practical  men.  Granted  that  many  other 
perils  summon  the  thinker  to  action,  here  is  an  evil  without  a  rival; 
for  we  have  here  to  deal  with  the  problem  of  a  dangerous  appetite 
abetted  by  a  vast  commercial  interest.  Its  dimensions  are  appalling. 
The  Special  Commissioner  of  the  United  States  Labor  Department, 
Dr.  Gould,  said:  "The  danger  resident  in  these  huge  national 
liquor  bills  reaches  beyond  misery  and  moral  degradation.  Civili- 
zation itself  is  menaced  by  this  growing  economic  waste."  In  saying 
this,  I  think  he  had  in  mind  not  his  own  country  alone,  where  in 
proportion  the  waste  is  considerably  less  than  in  others.  We,  at 
any  rate,  coming  together  from  many  lands,  know  that  his  solemn 
warning  finds  ample  illustration  in  them  all.  The  evil  arising  from 
the  use  of  intoxicants  is  world-wide,  and  calls  for  a  world-wide 
campaign  against  it.  The  language  of  the  Commissioner  is  in  no 
degree  exaggerated.  The  resources  of  wisdom  and  vigor  in  the 
world's  ruling  races  are  no  doubt  great,  and  appear  equal  to  most 
things;  but  in  this  connection  even  the  strongest  nations  are  almost 
paralyzed,  while  subject  races  wither  away  under  this  plague  like 
sheep  under  the  pestilence. 


5" 

No  historic  age  has  been  free  from  it,  and  always  and  everywhere 
the  story  of  loss  and  misery  has  been  the  same.  But  in  our  age  the 
problem  has  assumed  a  more  formidable  shape  than  hitherto.  The 
appetite  for  something  to  drug  the  mind  and  veil  the  face  of  reality 
with  temporary  illusiveness  was  sufficiently  difficult  to  meet  when 
its  cravings  were  left  to  the  casual  stimulus  of  local  circumstances. 
To-day  the  trade  venture  in  alcoholic  drink  is  bound  up  with  huge 
finance.  The  conditions  of  modern  commerce  and  the  facilities  for 
rapid  distribution  arm  this  business  with  a  far-reaching  effect  quite 
beyond  precedent.  All  the  arts  and  devices  discoverable  by  eager 
and  ingenious  men,  who  act  together  for  lucrative  ends,  promote 
its  extension.  It  is  powerful  to  manipulate  houses  of  legislature, 
to  control  local  administration,  including  police;  and,  as  for  its  adver- 
tising, that  is  on  so  liberal  a  scale  that  great  journals  are  said  "to 
float  on  whiskey,  with  some  assistance  from  soap."  No  one  who 
has  had  experience  in  this  matter  will  deny  that  such  a  sleepless 
financial  interest  is  much  harder  to  fight  than  the  intermittent  appe- 
tite upon  which  it  thrives. 

We  must  keep  these  facts  steadily  before  us  if  we  are  intelligently 
to  enter  upon  this  field  of  battle.  Of  course  such  an  interest  puts 
the  best  face  it  can  upon  the  trade  in  which  it  is  engaged.  Its  pleas 
are  specious,  but  they  can  deceive  few.  The  trade  in  intoxicants, 
say  its  promoters,  exists  for  the  convenience  of  the  public.  "What 
people  want,  people  will  have."  They  ask  in  the  name  of  freedom, 
May  not  a  man  have  his  glass  if  he  likes,  and  if  he  pays  for  it? 
Sometimes  they  assume  a  tone  of  raillery,  and  demand  in  the  name 
of  sociability  whether,  because  you  think  yourself  virtuous,  there 
shall  be  "no  more  cakes  and  ale."  Finally,  they  pose  as  friends  of 
virility  and  muscle,  and  roundly  declare  that  a  nation  of  water 
drinkers  must  go  down  in  the  struggle  for  existence  before  a  nation 
able  to  quaff  deep  its  beer  and  rum.  Considering,  however,  the 
swift  and  certain  loss  of  liberty  entailed  on  many  a  poor  fellow's 
glass  when  he  has  had  it,  considering  the  innumerable  quarrels  and 
fights  that  have  so  often  ended  the  tavern's  social  hour,  and,  above 
all,  considering  the  deplorable  physical  deterioration  of  large  masses 
of  our  people  through  the  use  of  alcohol,  more  than  through  any 
other  one  thing,  there  is  something  about  these  familiar  pleas  that 
approaches   the  magnificent.    But,   like   the  charge  of  the  Light 


512 

Brigade,  though  magnificent,  they  are  not  war.  The  real  moving 
force  is  not  the  public  weal,  but  the  publican's  wealth.  Sheer 
covetousness,  callous,  brutal,  the  blind  and  reckless  desire  of  gain 
at  whatever  cost  to  the  community,  voila  Vennemil 

The  formidable  trade  interests  now  confronting  the  reformer  do 
occasionally,  indeed,  get  an  academic  support  from  gentlemen  who 
do  not  happen  to  live  next  door  to  a  saloon.  These  amiable  theorists 
must  be  exonerated,  of  course,  from  the  suspicion  of  having  any 
commercial  or  political  axe  of  their  own  to  grind.  Liberty  is  the 
breath  of  their  nostrils,  their  one  hope  for  man.  They  would  fully 
sympathize  with  the  mood  of  Frederick  the  Great  when  he  announced 
that,  if  his  theologically-minded  subjects  of  Valangin  would  insist 
on  being  damned  eternally,  he  had  nothing  to  say  against  it.  Re- 
striction of  any  kind  is  abhorrent  to  such  fanatics  of  freedom.  To 
them  the  word  "abstinence"  sounds  almost  immoral,  and  "prohibi- 
tion "  savors  of  downright  tyranny.  If  you  say  society  must  at  some 
sacrifice  protect  itself  against  the  perils  of  drinking  habits,  these 
people  turn  philosophers,  and  coolly  argue  that  society's  drinking 
habits  did  not  evolve  without  "sufficient  reason."  Finally,  under 
more  or  less  pressure,  they  confess  they  like  a  drop  themselves,  and 
then  you  understand  why  they  champion  their  wine  decanter  as  if 
it  were  the  Holy  Grail.  Between  liberty  and  liking,  the  cause  of 
abstinence,  restriction,  prohibition,  fails  to  win  their  support.  And 
yet  if  they  would  but  leave  their  prepossessions  awhile,  and  listen 
to  facts! 

The  pertinent  facts,  alas!  need  no  long  seeking.  We  have  at 
hand  evidence  from  ages  the  most  distant  and  races  the  most  diverse. 
Its  weight  is  overwhelming.  Granted  that  Bacchus  has  been  a  god 
of  mirth  and  jollity,  he  has  charged  mankind  heavily  for  his  jest. 
Were  it  only  in  money's  worth,  the  bill  is  enormous.  We  pay  for 
drink  in  Great  Britain  each  year  nearly  three  times  what  that  very 
expensive  Boer  War  cost  us  each  year  it  lasted.  So  much  for  the 
drink  itself.  What  we  pay  for  the  consequences  of  the  drink  is 
incalculable.  Of  course  economy  is  a  dull  virtue,  especially  when 
one  has  plenty  of  cash.  But,  when  the  richest  states  of  Europe  are 
so  near  to  bankruptcy  that  millions  of  their  people  herd  together  in 
dens  that  defy  decency,  in  slums  that  Tennyson  called  expressively 
"the  warrens  of  the  poor,"  and  when  most  men  in  civilized  lands  all 


5i3 

over  the  world  are  such  daily  slaves  to  a  tyrant  they  call  "business" 
that  they  cannot  afford  rationally  to  enjoy  their  earthly  existence 
till  another — heavenly  or  otherwise — draws  near,  it  would  seem 
worth  while  to  consider  this  expenditure  on  drink,  and  especially 
on  its  consequences,  and  to  ask  whether  it  is  necessary  and  who 
pays  the  bill. 

In  Great  Britain  alone  there  are  fully  a  million  paupers,  with 
probably  double  that  number  chronically  on  the  verge  of  pauperism, 
say  one  in  thirteen  of  the  population.  Now  we  know  it  is  easy  and 
foolish  to  make  rash  and  sweeping  statements  as  to  the  causes  of 
this  mass  of  poverty,  with  its  attendant  misery  and  degradation. 
But  take  a  sample  fact.  Very  careful  inquiries  have  been  made  by 
capable  and  responsible  persons  from  time  to  time,  and  the  Man- 
chester guardians  of  the  poor,  for  instance,  announced  not  so  very 
long  ago,  that  over  51  per  cent,  of  the  cases  of  pauperism  in  their 
district  were  found  to  be  directly  caused  by  intemperance.  Probably 
few  would  doubt  that  there  were  many  additional  cases  where,  if 
indirect,  this  factor  was  no  less  really  an  influential  one.  There  is 
abundant  ground  for  believing  that  this  state  of  things  is  typical  of 
pauperism  generally. 

Again,  there  are  some  fourteen  thousand  prisoners  convicted 
yearly  in  the  United  Kingdom,  and  their  miserable  and  desperate 
army  is  kept  at  bay  by  an  extensive  array  of  police  and  prison  ward- 
ers, with  the  costly  supplement  of  judges  and  courts  and  the  whole 
paraphernalia  of  justice.  The  Rt.  Hon.  C.  T.  Ritchie,  speaking 
from  his  personal  knowledge  as  Home  Secretary  (in  an  adminis- 
tration not  thought  to  be  unfriendly  to  the  drink  trade),  said  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  in  1902,  "I  do  not  think  I  am  going  wide  of 
the  mark  when  I  say  that  nine-tenths  of  the  greatest  of  all  the  crimes 
have  been  in  the  main  caused  by  drunkenness."  The  chairman 
of  the  Prisons  Commission  of  Scotland  found  that  the  same  pro- 
portion held  good  as  regards  all  classes  of  crimes,  great  and  small. 
Officials  of  unimpeachable  authority  and  freedom  from  prejudice 
testified  over  and  over  again,  before  Lord  Peel's  Commission  eight 
years  ago,  that  but  for  the  drink  there  would  be  little  or  no  work  for 
police  or  prisons.  The  same  story  comes  from  other  lands.  The 
French  Minister  of  Justice  is  reported  as  saying  that  "no  less  than 
53  per  cent,  of  the  persons  convicted  of  murder,  57  per  cent,  of  those 


5^4 

convicted  of  arson,  and  90  per  cent,  of  those  convicted  for  causing 
bodily  harm  are  confirmed  drunkards."  The  New  South  Wales 
Drink  Commission,  while  deprecating  a  "tendency  to  exaggerate 
the  percentage  of  crimes  directly  caused  by  drink,"  found  that  very 
few  of  the  witnesses  examined  by  them  placed  it  lower  than  75. 
The  statement  is  attributed  to  Mr.  Carroll  D.  Wright  that  "  72  per 
cent,  of  the  crimes  in  Boston  are  liquor  crimes";  and  the  Massachu- 
setts State  Board  of  Charities  is  credited  with  the  report  in  1893 
that  "  the  proportion  of  crime  traceable  to  intemperate  persons  must 
be  set  down,  as  heretofore,  as  not  less  than  four-fifths."  But  I  might 
simply  fill  my  paper  with  similar  evidence,  supplied  not  by  cold- 
water  cranks,  but  by  persons  of  the  most  exceptional  knowledge  of 
the  subject  and  of  the  coolest  impartiality, — judges,  magistrates, 
commanders  of  regiments,  captains  of  ships,  chaplains,  governors  of 
prisons,  inspectors,  State  Commissioners,  and  other  experts, — who 
all  find  in  this  one  evil  the  most  fertile  source  of  all  kinds  of  breaches 
of  the  law. 

Thus,  because  of  the  beer  barrel  and  the  gin-tap,  the  whole  com- 
munity goes  in  fear  and  jeopardy,  and  has  to  maintain  a  costly  and 
ugly  machinery  to  get  along  at  all.  As  for  the  people  who  indi- 
vidually suffer  by  these  things,  who  shall  tell  of  their  woes  I  Homes, 
so  called,  are  continued  in  misery  or  finally  broken  up  in  shame. 
Nearly  all  cases  of  desertion  are  traceable  to  this  evil  on  the  part  of 
husband  or  wife.  Scarcely  any  instances  occur  of  cruelty  to  children, 
such  as  brings  the  offenders  before  the  law,  where  drink  is  not  found 
to  have  deadened  the  parent's  natural  affection.  The  divorce  courts 
repeat  the  same  monotonous  story  of  drink-weakened  moral  fibre, 
with  the  most  disastrous  results.  And  who  is  ignorant  of  the  shames 
and  sorrows  which  relatives  in  agony  seek  to  hide,  and  concerning 
which  decent  folk  keep  a  silence  intended  to  be  merciful,  which, 
without  emerging  into  the  glare  of  the  courts,  exist  none  the  less  really 
beneath  the  surface  of  society  ?  At  one  end  of  the  scale  little  children 
by  thousands  die  untimely,  or  survive  only  to  bear  the  blight  of 
their  dram-poisoned  nursing.  At  the  other  bright  and  clever  natures, 
once  an  honor  and  a  pride  to  their  friends,  go  down  into  the  gutter. 
These  are  the  every-day  experiences,  not  the  unusual  visitations,  of 
organized  communities  boasting  of  their  civilization.  I  speak  not 
here  of  the  state  of  things  where  crude  humanity  becomes  the  prey 


5i5 

of  the  drink-seller  in  the  purlieus  of  the  docks,  of  the  far-off  quar- 
ries and  mines,  and  the  poor  villages  of  aboriginal  races. 

One  more  item  in  this  already  unparalleled  "drink  bill"  must 
be  mentioned.  There  is  a  feature  of  modern  life  which  must  perplex, 
if  it  does  not  absolutely  dismay,  every  student  of  human  affairs. 
We  often  speak  hopefully,  confidently,  of  progress,  and  believe 
that  ameliorative  influences  are  slowly,  but  surely,  raising  the  general 
level  of  intelligence  the  world  over.  But  what  about  that  dread 
shadow  on  the  path  of  the  dominant  races, — insanity  ?  The  figures 
seem  to  show  unmistakably  that  this  is  a  growing  malady.  If  it  is 
really  increasing  at  the  rate  that  the  records  of  the  asylums  appear  to 
prove,  if  part  of  the  apparent  growth  is  not  to  be  set  down  to  more 
careful  observation  and  registration,  then,  indeed,  the  prospects  of 
mankind  would  seem  almost  desperate.  But,  whatever  conclusion 
we  form  as  to  that,  we  have  testimony  from  all  sides,  from  Germany, 
France,  Belgium,  and  other  European  states,  as  well  as  from  the 
different  English-speaking  nations  that  belt  the  globe,  that  alcohol 
is  one  of  the  chief  ascertainable  causes  of  insanity.  No  one  can 
really  be  surprised  at  such  testimony  who  has  at  all  intelligently 
followed  the  course  of  modern  investigation  with  regard  to  the  struct- 
ure of  the  brain  and  the  action  of  alcohol  upon  its  delicate  tissues. 
There  is  no  longer  room  for  doubt  that,  just  as  a  clumsy  finger  and 
thumb  spoil  the  bloom  on  a  peach,  so  the  clutch  of  this  drug  worsens 
every  time  the  tender  organ  of  mind.  The  damage  may  at  first 
be  slight,  and  bounteous  nature  is  often  lavish  in  putting  forth 
remedial  energy;  but  there  comes  an  hour  when,  under  incessant 
injury,  if  slight  seeming,  the  peach's  bloom  is  ruined.  Formerly, 
only  the  grosser  forms  of  alcoholic  poisoning  were  much  noticed;  but 
modern  research,  carried  on  in  the  laboratories  of  unprejudiced 
scientists  east  and  west,  shows  that  even  what  are  called  "dietetic 
doses"  tend  to  the  irretrievable  injury  of  brain  and  nerves.  Well 
might  the  great  Edison  say,  in  explanation  of  his  abstinence  from 
alcohol,  "I  have  a  better  use  for  my  brains."  But  really  there  is 
no  need  for  any  one  who  opens  his  eyes  and  ears  to  run  about  in 
search  of  the  verdicts  of  savans.  Who  has  not  seen  ample  evidence, 
before  the  scientists  told  us  why,  that  the  inhibition  of  alcohol  at 
once  weakens  the  mind's  self-control,  just  while  it  flatters  the  drinker 
with  an  altogether  mistaken  notion  of  his  own  wit,  wisdom,  and 


5i6 

brilliance  in  general  ?  Long  before  the  stage  is  reached  when  friends 
grow  anxious  and  apprehensive,  we  see  around  us  people  who  are 
otherwise  sensible  set  free  in  talk,  blabbing  of  their  neighbor's 
business,  if  not  their  own,  and  cajoled  into  bargains  which  they  will 
repent  of  to-morrow.  Young  fellows,  usually  shrewd  and  gentle- 
manly enough,  grow  excited  and  loosed  from  the  wholesome  checks 
of  modesty  and  self-respect.  Grave  and  reverend  seniors,  with 
flushed  face  and  roving  eye,  draw  near  to  the  bench  and  cap  of 
the  fool.  Girls  grow  giddy  and  perilously  adventurous.  In  short, 
here  is  the  modern  Circe's  cup.  And,  when  the  poor  victims  have 
drained  it,  their  blood  bears  its  baleful  ingredient  along  their  life 
tides  with  such  deadly  sureness  that  the  next  generation  rises  with 
accusing  finger  to  say,  "Thus  didst  thou!"  We  have  in  London 
special  schools  for  "mentally  defective"  children, — those  poor,  dull 
pupils  who  would  be  utterly  unable  to  keep  up  with  the  lessons  of 
average  children,  and  who  must  be  catered  for  separately.  Official 
inquiries  into  the  family  history  of  one  hundred  consecutive  cases 
of  such  children  showed  that  in  forty-two  there  was  a  clear  history 
of  drunkenness  on  the  part  of  one  at  least  of  the  parents.  In  only 
6  per  cent,  of  normal  children  was  there  found  to  be  a  drunken 
parent. 

Poverty,  crime,  immorality,  ineffectiveness,  insanity,  disease, — 
where  shall  the  awful  indictment  end?  As  to  disease,  let  this  one 
eloquent  fact  suffice.  The  poor  publican  himself  (I  do  not  say  the 
highly  respectable  shareholder  in  the  brewery  company,  but  the 
man  who  froths  the  pot)  is  the  surest  victim  of  his  own  wares.  The 
returns  of  the  Registrar-General  show  that  this  class  of  citizen  dies 
off  far  more  quickly  than  any  other,  even  those  engaged  in  notoriously 
"dangerous"  trades.  In  fact,  our  British  authorities  officially 
declare  the  making  and  selling  of  intoxicants  to  be  the  "deadliest 
and  most  dangerous  of  occupations."  Talk  about  missions  to  the 
poor  savages!  Is  it  not  time  that  a  mission  were  established  to 
rescue  the  wretched  victims  of  so  fearful  a  scourge  ? 

Now  I  feel  sure  that  on  reviewing  these  and  similar  facts  there 
cannot  be  one  intelligent  person  whose  mind  is  not  fully  convinced 
as  to  the  gravity  of  the  problem  and  the  urgency  of  solving  it.  Where 
disagreement  comes  in  is  as  regards  the  steps  proposed  to  be  taken. 
Frankly,  I  confess  myself  one  of  those  who  would  fight  intoxicants 


5*7 

by  all  honorable  methods,  and  I  would  accept  any  ally  who  would 
lessen  the  sphere  of  their  influence.  There  has  been  hitherto  too 
much  quarrelling  in  the  face  of  the  enemy.  Undoubtedly  there  is 
need  for  the  most  careful  discrimination  of  conditions  and  the 
most  prudential  calculation  of  the  consequences  of  different  courses 
of  action.  But,  when  the  house  is  burning,  it  is  somewhat  late  to 
discuss  hydrostatics.  Whoever  brings  but  a  bucket  shall  be  welcome. 
Many  here  to-day  may  have  their  own  favorite  lines  of  advance. 
So  long  as  we  do  advance  at  all,  let  us  not  too  severely  criticise  one 
another.  In  different  countries  and  localities  different  methods  are 
appropriate.  In  some  places  pioneers  of  reform  have  to  be  content 
to  work  very  much  alone  and  by  moral  suasion;  but  even  in  Russia, 
where  the  chance  of  influencing  legislation  seems  smallest,  the 
prophet's  voice  is  not  raised  in  vain,  as  we  see  by  the  formation  of 
an  abstaining  society  through  the  teachings  of  Tolstoy.  In  France, 
on  the  other  hand,  we  have  seen  the  civic  authorities  in  Paris  pub- 
lishing and  very  widely  disseminating  a  placard  setting  forth  the 
dangers  of  drink,  the  mistake  of  supposing  that  it  imparts  muscular 
energy,  and  the  fearful  heritage  of  misery  it  bequeaths.  This 
placard  has  been  copied  in  some  communities  in  Great  Britain,  but 
those  strict  economists  who  watch  so  unceasingly  over  the  interests 
of  "the  trade"  have  here  and  there  secured  a  decision  that  the 
printing  and  issuing  of  such  material  is  ultra  vires.  In  Belgium,  one 
notices,  there  has  been  a  singular  originality  in  the  method  adopted 
in  certain  quarters.  This  hard-working  little  country  appears  to 
have  a  reputation  for  drunkenness  which  only  my  own  country  can 
rival.  But  amongst  reformers  there  the  Socialist  Party  has  appealed 
to  its  supporters  to  abstain  from  alcohol  for  several  reasons,  the  third 
and  last  being  that  abstinence  would  improve  their  health,  the  second 
that  it  would  provide  funds  for  political  propaganda,  and  the  first 
and  foremost  that  it  would  cripple  the  government's  finances.  Well, 
we  remember  how  Saint  Paul  regarded  that  preaching  of  the  gospel 
which  was  not  altogether  from  purest  gospel  motives.  Whatever 
the  motive,  let  them  but  "preach  Christ,"  even  "of  envy,"  and  he 
would  rejoice. 

Amongst  the  many  attempts  made  in  different  countries,  the 
Scandinavian  method  of  grappling  with  the  evils  of  intemperance 
stands  out  prominently.    It  has  been  much  criticised  as  developing 


5i8 

a  municipal  interest  in  the  continuance  of  the  trade  in  intoxicants, 
but  at  any  rate  the  evils  in  Scandinavia  itself  are  far  less  in  evidence 
now  than  before  the  trade  was  taken  over  from  private  hands.  The 
number  of  recruits,  for  example,  rejected  as  unfit  for  service,  is 
now  far  below  what  it  used  to  be.  And  as  to  national  fitness,  not 
for  the  war  of  violence,  but  for  that  competition  which  exists  every- 
where, the  words  of  the  Prussian  Count  Douglas  were  surely  wise 
when  he  said,  on  introducing  a  temperance  bill  into  the  Prussian 
Diet  in  1902,  "those  countries  where  temperance  was  inculcated  and 
practised  would  ultimately  secure  the  advantage.  In  particular" 
(the  quotation  is  from  the  Times)  "  he  directed  attention  to  the  suc- 
cess of  the  temperance  movement  in  the  United  States  of  America, 
where  there  were  ten  millions  of  abstainers."  Reverting  to  the 
question  of  co-operative  method,  attempts  are  being  made  in  Eng- 
land, though  on  no  very  large  scale,  to  get  the  trade  into  the  hands 
of  trusts  and  companies  who  for  little  or  no  profit  will  be  content 
to  meet  existing  demands  for  drink,  without  fostering  an  exaggerated 
business.  I  am  afraid  it  will  be  long  before  any  such  methods  will 
become  general.  We  are  left  to  struggle  as  best  we  can,  socially 
and  politically,  with  that  vast  commercial  interest  which  every  year 
extends  its  hold  upon  general  support  through  its  lists  of  shareholders 
all  over  the  kingdom.  It  is  estimated  that  something  like  five  hun- 
dred million  dollars  are  subscribed  as  stock  in  the  various  com- 
panies represented  on  our  exchanges.  This  wide-spreading  social 
and  financial  power  has  great  weight  in  both  Houses  of  Parliament 
and  in  local  councils.  It  commands  the  services  of  the  most  dex- 
terous agents  in  seeking  means  to  avoid  restrictive  laws.  The  motto 
unblushingly  put  forth  by  the  engineers  of  this  party  is,  "  Our  trade, 
our  politics."  With  wistful  eyes  many  of  us  look  to  this  great  family 
of  States  in  the  west,  and  to  our  own  colonies,  where  the  enlightened 
principle  of  "  local  option,"  in  one  form  or  other,  has  been  enforced. 
We  have  seen  enough  benefit  in  the  little  areas  that  exist  even  in  our 
land,  where  the  drink  is  not  forced  upon  a  community,  to  wish  that 
the  people  generally  might  at  least  be  permitted  to  say  whether  it 
should  be  there  or  not. 

I  do  not  conceive,  however,  that  my  duty  to-day  is  to  discuss  and 
weigh  the  merits  of  any  particular  method.  What  I  do  plead  for 
is  for  your  real  and  permanent  interest  in  this  vital  problem  of  our 


5i9 

day,  for  your  personal  decision,  and  for  co-operation  all  along  the 
line.  Earlier  in  this  paper  I  spoke  of  abstinence,  restriction,  pro- 
hibition. It  appears  to  me  that  this  order  is  the  sensible  and  prac- 
tical one.  Some  excellent  people,  I  know,  speak  of  abstinence  as 
if  it  were  an  extreme  measure.  Large  and,  so  far  as  I  know,  useful 
societies  exist,  the  members  of  which  are  allowed  to  take  a  glass  at 
meals,  and  at  no  other  time.  Other  people,  the  bulk  of  decent  citi- 
zens, I  suppose,  do  not  even  bind  themselves  to  this,  but  take  their 
drink  in  "  moderation,"  as  they  call  it.  Now  I  am  sure  that  no  one 
in  an  assembly  like  this  would  presume  to  dictate  to  another's  con- 
science. Let  each  be  fully  persuaded.  But  how  any  man  who  has 
ever  seen  with  his  own  eyes  the  ruined  humanity,  the  blighted  homes, 
the  shattered  health,  the  misery  and  shame  of  his  fellow-creatures, 
can  any  longer  touch  this  accursed  thing,  I  cannot  understand. 
Were  it  anything  else  that  wrought  so  much  evil  on  earth,  if  it  did 
not  come  with  an  insinuating  tickle  of  the  palate  and  a  delusive 
touch  of  flattery  upon  the  nerves  as  it  takes  the  reason  prisoner, 
there  is  no  man  but  would  exile  this  pest  forever  from  his  home, 
and,  if  possible,  from  the  community.  Is  that  pleasant  taste,  then, 
really  worth  enjoying  in  such  company  and  at  such  a  price?  As 
for  taking  pecuniary  profit  out  of  such  a  trade,  what  pity  is 
large  enough,  what  horror  deep  enough,  to  cover  such  a  tainted 
transaction?  Cain  killed  Abel,  but  at  least  he  didn't  do  it  for 
money. 

We  may  talk  about  international  unity  and  arbitration  and  the 
triumph  of  the  Church  Universal  and  all  that;  but  let  every  man 
be  fully  assured  of  this:  there  cannot  be  peace  on  earth,  or  sweet 
religion  ruling  in  our  hearths  and  homes,  till  this  "  devil  in  solution  " 
has  been  exorcised  from  our  midst.  Abstain,  and  you  set  him  at  a 
distance  at  once.  "Others  will  not  abstain"?  Then  restrict  their 
chances  of  being  egged  on  to  excess.  Absolute  prohibition  is  the 
final  happy  goal,  not,  however,  to  be  really  successful  till  the  mind 
of  the  people  runs  abreast  of  the  law,  and  that  it  shall  do  so  is  the 
task  of  the  churches  specially  to  secure.  We,  in  particular,  are  met 
together  as  those  who  are  striving  toward  the  creation  of  a  religious 
life  free  alike  from  needless  fears  and  baseless  hopes,  but  grounded 
firmly  in  the  solid  rock  of  the  soul's  own  experiences.  Who,  if  not 
we,  should  recognize  that  an  intelligent  faith  needs  clear  brains  to 


5  20 

conceive  it,  that  a  conquering  and  world-redeeming  practical  religion 
needs  the  soundest,  healthiest  men  and  women  to  carry  it  to  victory  ? 
We,  of  the  liberal  churches,  are  so  far  from  seeing  our  work  "done," 
as  sometimes  we  hear,  or  even  inertly  say,  that  we  are  really  only 
at  the  beginning  of  things.  We  are  here  at  this  time  to  knit  a  little 
closer  the  ties  of  understanding  and  consent  between  thinkers  usually 
far  scattered,  to  feel  our  common  needs  and  partake  of  our  common 
inspirations.  Shall  we  separate  without  an  understanding  in  respect 
to  this  most  practical,  most  pressing  of  all  social  reforms?  Shall 
we  not  go  to  our  different  spheres  of  labor  resolved  to  do  our  duty 
in  this  regard,  if  by  any  means  we  may  save  some?  It  is  ours  es- 
pecially to  educate  our  own  young  people  in  habits  and  principles 
of  perfect  sobriety,  to  stimulate  our  fellow-worshippers  to  more  prac- 
tical zeal  in  this  outstanding  social  work,  and  to  raise  our  voice  as 
citizens  against  every  encroachment  by  the  reckless  exploiters  of 
human  weakness,  while  we  endeavor  to  secure  healthier  conditions 
of  home  life  and  occupation  and  more  rational  forms  of  recreation 
for  the  people.  Above  all,  we  have  to  appeal  to  the  diviner  element 
in  every  heart,  and  to  plead,  not  only  in  the  name  of  human  pity, 
but  of  human  honor,  against  so  horrible  a  desecration  of  life  as  the 
use  of  intoxicants  involves. 


52i     . 

After  a  few  words  from  Rev.  Charles  Travers,  of  London,  the 
meeting  was  closed  with  the  following  brief  address  from  Rev.  C.  F. 
Dole:— 


GOOD   WILL,   BY  REV.  CHARLES  F.   DOLE. 

I  think  in  all  these  questions  one's  mind  sways  back  and  forth 
between  methods  and  schemes  and  plans,  on  the  one  hand,  and  on 
the  other  hand  to  the  question  which  underlies  all  plans  and  all 
methods;  namely,  what  sort  of  humanity  have  you?  That  second 
thought,  to  which  the  pendulum  is  ever  swinging  back,  must  ever 
swing  back,  has  been  with  us  in  all  the  addresses  this  afternoon. 
What  is  the  essence  of  religion?  What  is  it  that  drives  the  wheels 
of  all  this  machinery?  What  is  it,  to  change  the  figure,  that  makes 
the  harmony  among  all  the  instruments,  without  which,  no  matter 
how  beautiful  they  are  and  costly,  the  music  would  be  vain? 

It  is,  in  one  word,  good  will,  is  it  not?  I  like  the  word  better 
than  love.  We  say,  "Love  our  neighbor."  That  is  a  great  con- 
tract. You  cannot  love  everybody  in  the  sense  in  which  the  word 
is  mainly  used.  You  cannot  compel  yourself  to  love  people,  but 
you  can  turn  on  your  good  will.  You  can  turn  on  your  good  will  to 
anybody.  If  you  are  angry,  you  can  turn  around  and  turn  on  your 
good  will  to  the  man  against  whom  you  attempted  to  strike  out 
and  hurt  him. 

We  conceive  of  the  central  power  of  the  universe  as  sometimes 
Love,  but  more  deeply  as  Will,  and  as  Good  Will.  We  say  that 
the  highest  conception  of  the  power  that  runs  the  universe  is  a  will 
managing  all  things  through  intelligence,  and  we  say  that  religion 
consists  in  the  feeling  toward  this  mighty  power  of  goodness,  and 
religion  consists  also  in  the  acting  in  unison  with  this  power  of  good- 
ness. This  spirit  of  worship,  the  spirit  of  religion,  is  the  spirit  of  good 
will  possessing  us.  We  are  at  our  highest  in  the  mood  of  worship 
when  we  simply  give  ourselves  to  let  the  good  will  of  the  universe  pour 
through  us  and  do  its  work,  and  this  combines,  does  it  not,  idealism 
with  concrete  reality? 

What  is  the  good  of  all  the  worship  in  all  the  churches  if  it  is  mere 
meditation  on  high  things,  if  it  is  simply  pleasurable  emotion  ?  But 
suppose  it  sends  us  forth  possessed  with  this  good  will,  with  the 


522 

emphasis  on  will,  to  do  the  work  of  the  spirit  of  the  universe,  then 
it  is  something  that  makes  us  better.  It  is  the  measure  forever  of 
all  our  worship  and  all  our  religion.  As  the  man  goes  forth  from 
the  church,  not  with  the  sense  of  enjoyment,  not  with  the  sense  even 
that  he  is  God's  child,  but  with  a  deep  sense  that  he  is  here  in  this 
world  to  do  God's  good  will  for  his  brothers,  then  the  religion  and  the 
worship  have  done  him  some  good.  And  that  applies,  does  it  not,  to 
all  these  questions  such  as  we  have  been  touching  upon  this  after- 
noon? It  applies  to  the  question  of  labor  and  capital.  The  big 
thing  is  to  get  the  laborers  (we  are  all  laborers)  and  the  employers 
(and  we  are  all  in  some  sense  employers)  so  possessed  with 
good  will  toward  one  another  that  this  spirit  of  good  will,  when  we 
face  each  other  with  that  light  in  our  eyes,  solves  all  the  questions. 
On  the  liquor  question  the  big  thing  is,  What  does  the  spirit  of  good 
will  bid  us  do  ?  And  so  with  all  the  rest  of  them.  And  the  great 
prayer,  I  take  it,  is  all  embraced  in  just  these  few  words:  "Thy 
kingdom  [that  is,  the  rule  of  heart]  come,  thy  will  [goodwill]  be 
done." 


523 


DEPARTMENT  OF  ORIENTAL  RELIGION. 

Held  at  the  Second  Church  in  Boston,  Wednesday  evening,  Sept. 
2S»  I9°7-  Hon.  James  M.  Morton,  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Judicial 
Court,  presiding. 

Opening  Anthem,  sung  by  Chorus. 

Devotional   Service,  conducted  by  Rabbi   Charles  Fleischer,  of 
Boston. 
Hymn,  "  God  is  my  Strong  Salvation." 

Prayer. 

Let  us  adore  the  ever-living  God  and  render  praise  unto  Him  who 
spread  out  the  heavens  and  established  the  earth,  whose  glory  is 
revealed  in  the  heavens  above,  and  whose  greatness  is  manifest 
throughout  the  world.  He  alone  is  our  God.  We  bow  our  head 
and  bend  our  knee  and  magnify  the  King  of  kings,  the  Holy  One, 
the  ever  blest.  May  the  time  not  be  far,  O  God,  when  Thy  name 
shall  be  worshipped  over  all  the  world,  when  unbelief  shall  disappear, 
and  error  be  no  more.  We  fervently  pray  that  the  day  may  come 
upon  which  all  men  shall  invoke  Thy  name,  when  corruption  and 
evil  shall  give  way  to  the  purity  of  goodness,  when  superstition  shall 
no  longer  enslave  the  minds  nor  idolatry  blind  the  eyes,  when  all 
inhabitants  of  the  earth  shall  perceive  that  to  Thee  alone  every  knee 
must  bow  and  every  tongue  give  homage.  Oh,  may  all  created  in 
Thy  image  recognize  that  they  are  brethren,  so  that  they,  one  in 
spirit  and  one  in  fellowship,  may  be  forever  united  before  Thee. 
Then  shall  Thy  kingdom  be  established  on  earth  and  the  word  of 
Thy  ancient  seer  be  fulfilled:  "The  Eternal  shall  rule  forever  and 
aye.  On  that  day  the  Eternal  shall  be  one,  and  His  name  shall  be 
one."    Amen. 

Hymn,  "  Come,  Kingdom  of  our  God." 


524 

Judge  Morton. — For  many  years  a  strong  friendship  has  existed 
between  this  country  and  Japan.  It  has  been  and  is  based,  I  be- 
lieve, upon  reciprocal  good  will  and  upon  a  mutual  active  sense  of 
justice.  I  am  sure  we  all  hope  that  it  will  continue  unbroken.  But, 
if  anything  should  be  needed  to  cement  more  strongly  the  friendship 
which  exists  between  the  two  countries,  for  myself  I  should  be  willing 
to  make  them  a  deed  of  gift  of  the  Philippines,  if  they  would  take 
them.  [Laughter  and  applause.]  Our  Liberal  Faith  has  found  a 
fertile  soil,  I  believe,  in  Japan.  The  seed  has  not  fallen  on  alto- 
gether stony  ground,  as  is  apt  to  be  the  case  with  alien  religions. 
Our  doctrines  have  been  received  with  a  hospitality  which  we  should 
expect  of  a  people  so  thoughtful  and  of  such  open  minds.  I  have 
the  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you  this  evening  Mr.  Saichiro  Kanda, 
Secretary  of  the  Japan  Unitarian  Association,  who  will  speak  to  us 
on  Japan. 


525 


RELIGIOUS   FORCES   OF   JAPAN. 

BY  SAICHIRO    KANDA,    SECRETARY   OF  THE  JAPANESE  UNITARIAN 
ASSOCIATION,   TOKYO,    JAPAN. 

Our  way  of  thought  in  Japan  may  need  some  explanation,  in  order 
to  make  you  fully  understand  it,  just  as  our  language  needs  interpre- 
tation. Especially  does  our  religious  thought  need  to  be  explained. 
It  is  difficult  for  me  to  express  my  idea  satisfactorily,  because  of  my 
poor  knowledge  of  your  language.  However,  I  will  try  to  do 
my  best. 

In  the  mind  of  the  educated  Japanese  it  is  almost  impossible  to 
think  religion  without  morality.  Therefore,  the  religious  forces  of 
Japan  cannot  be  measured  simply  by  an  exhibit  of  rituals  and  cere- 
monials. They  must  be  found  in  the  people's  moral  condition,  as 
displayed  in  their  daily  life.  If  there  are  working  in  Japan  the  forces 
of  piety,  fraternity,  nobility,  self-sacrifice,  patriotism,  heroism,  these 
may  surely  be  called  our  religious  forces.  Nay,  they  are  our 
religion.  In  other  words,  faith  without  works  is  not  religion  at  all 
in  Japan. 

To  us  it  is  immoral  to  believe  a  doctrine  which  is  ambiguous,  self- 
contradictory,  not  satisfactorily  understood  by  our  reason,  or  not  in 
harmony  with  our  conscience.  Because  of  these  sentiments,  our 
religious  ideal  is  rational  and  Unitarian.  We  desire  a  moral  and 
rational  religion,  and  we  find  Unitarianism  to  be  a  religion  of  charac- 
ter and  rationality. 

Permit  me  now  to  give  you  a  slight  glimpse  at  the  history  of  these 
facts. 

In  the  dawn  of  the  new  era  of  our  empire,  or  soon  after  the  time  of 
Commodore  Perry's  arrival,  Protestant  Christianity  was  brought  to 
our  people  in  company  with  modern  science.  We  welcomed  the 
science;  but  we  looked  at  Christianity  with  suspicious  eyes,  because 
we  had  had  some  ill  traditions  of  this  faith  of  the  West.     To  be 


526 

called  Christian  is  an  honor  in  this  country,  but  it  is  often  the  reverse 
in  Japan.  So,  naturally,  we  took  a  critical  attitude  when  we  faced 
the  Christian  teachings.  But  now,  having  had  a  long  experience  in 
contact  with  Christians,  and  having  come  to  a  good  understanding 
with  each  other,  our  people  have  perfect  confidence  in  Christianity 
and  especially  in  Protestantism.  And  also  we  are  assured  by  our 
Constitution  perfect  freedom  in  the  exercise  of  religious  faith. 

But  when  we  study  what  Christianity  is  we  apply  to  it  the  methods 
of  science,  the  methods  of  free  inquiry.  Because,  as  I  said  before, 
Christianity  was  brought  to  us  in  company  with  modern  science. 
We  like  to  understand  Christianity  on  a  scientific  basis.  When  you 
know  these  facts,  you  will  easily  perceive  that  Japanese  Christians 
are  essentially  rational,  liberal,  and  Unitarian,  no  matter  to  what 
denomination  they  may  belong.  They  are  fighting  against  com- 
mon enemies  in  opposing  utilitarianism,  indifferentism,  materialism, 
mammonism,  and,  finally,  the  obsolete  creeds  which  ignore  liberty  in 
thought  and  freedom  to  worship  as  conscience  directs. 

In  this  state  of  society,  Unitarianism  was  introduced  to  us  by  your 
representatives,  Rev.  Arthur  May  Knapp,  Rev.  Clay  MacCauley, 
and  Rev.  William  I.  Lawrance.  So  you  will  not  wonder  Unitarian 
views  of  faith  were  welcomed  by  the  Japanese,  and  have  been  obtain- 
ing a  strong  footing  among  our  educated  and  aspiring  young  men 
and  women. 

Since  Unitarianism  was  introduced  into  the  Sunrise  Empire,  it 
has  contributed  some  new  and  powerful  influences  to  its  neighboring 
faiths.  On  one  hand,  Unitarianism  has  aroused  all  our  religionists 
from  their  long  sleep,  and  encouraged  them  to  study  Buddhism,  as 
well  as  Christianity,  by  the  scientific  method.  As  one  of  the  effects 
of  this  contribution,  there  has  arisen  a  new  movement  which  is  called 
"The  Association  of  New  Buddhists."  They  claim  that  they  them- 
selves are  Buddhistic  Unitarians,  because  they  spring  out  of  Bud- 
dhism historically,  and  are  Unitarian  in  spirit.  On  the  other  hand, 
we  have  contributed  to  our  orthodox  Christian  friends  a  new  light 
in  the  higher  criticism  and  historical  study  of  the  Bible  and  of  their 
creeds.  As  a  natural  effect  of  their  study  they  are  becoming  broad 
in  their  religious  opinions.  They  no  longer  fight  the  Buddhists, 
because  they  know  that  there  are  common  enemies  that  Buddhists 
as  well  as  themselves  must  march  against. 


527 

The  most  obvious  fact  of  the  friendly  feeling  among  our  religious 
believers  is,  I  am  very  glad  to  say,  the  organization  of  the  Union  of 
Japanese  Religionists. 

About  two  years  ago  the  preliminary  meetings  for  the  organization 
of  this  Union  were  held  in  our  Unity  Hall  in  Tokyo.  I  am  honored 
in  having  been  one  of  its  projectors.  When  the  Union  was  first 
organized,  we  held  a  meeting  in  the  hall  of  the  Young  Men's  Chris- 
tian Association  in  Tokyo,  and  public  speeches  were  given  in  its 
behalf. 

The  members  of  the  Union  are  among  the  most  prominent  per- 
sonages among  Buddhists,  Shintoists,  and  Christians.  Their  objects 
are  the  same  as  those  of  your  International  Council.  This  Union 
has  an  annual  conference,  besides  its  contingent  meetings  and  fes- 
tivals. In  the  last  year  its  members  raised  15,000  yen,  or  $7,500,  as 
the  contribution  to  the  rebuilding  and  repairing  of  the  nine  Christian 
churches  which  had  been  accidentally  damaged  and  burned  by  the 
mob  that  arose  at  the  time  when  the  Portsmouth  negotiations  were 
made  known  to  us.  A  large  part  of  the  money  was  the  contribution 
of  the  Buddhists  and  Shintoists.  It  is  well  to  help  each  other,  and  to 
show  sympathy  in  the  disasters  that  come  to  our  neighbor.  I  believe 
this  is  the  true  Christian  spirit. 

As  to  our  church  work,  let  me  say  that  we  have  one  Unitarian 
church  in  Tokyo.  In  this  church  we  have  two  sermons  every  Sun- 
day morning,  from  10  to  12,  which  are  exclusively  devoted  to  religious 
and  ethical  subjects.  In  the  evening  we  have  also  two  lectures,  from 
7  to  9.  We  have  about  750  names  enrolled  as  members  of  our  Tokyo 
church.  But  most  of  them  are  not  residents  of  the  city.  They  come 
from  all  over  the  country.  The  majority  of  our  church  members  are 
graduates  and  undergraduates  of  our  colleges  and  universities. 
When  they  ate  graduated  they  scatter  in  all  directions  over  the 
country  in  order  to  practise  their  professions.  So  our  church  in 
Toyko  is  just  like  a  college.  In  spring  we  send  away  our  graduates, 
and  we  receive  in  autumn  Freshmen. 

Besides  this  church  there  is  another  organization  which  is  called  the 
"Unity  Club,"  of  which  I  am  president.  This  club  is  serving  as  the 
medium  for  connecting  our  church  members  with  the  world  outside. 
Most  of  the  members  of  this  club  are  young  men  and  young  women. 
^Recently  they  have  been  taking  a  most  important  part  in  our  church 


528 

affairs.  The  club  was  organized  some  years  ago,  when  Mr.  Mac- 
Cauley  was  in  Tokyo,  and  afterward  I  reorganized  it  into  its  present 
shape.  It  has  three  departments;  namely,  the  reading  department, 
the  musical  training  department,  and  the  department  of  amusement, 
The  club  has  its  regular  meetings  on  every  Sunday  afternoon  in  our 
Unity  Hall.  On  the  first  Saturday  evening  of  every  month  its  mem- 
bers have  a  festival,  in  order  to  cultivate  their  social  life.  At  this 
dinner  party  some  of  them  are  appointed  by  the  officers  of  the  reading 
department  to  read  papers  or  to  give  reviews  of  the  books  which  they 
have  read  during  the  previous  month. 

We  have  had  also  a  monthly  magazine  as  one  of  our  organs  since 
1890,  and  I  am  one  of  the  editorial  staff.  By  means  of  this  monthly 
publication  we  are  circulating  our  views  among  our  scattered 
members. 

Besides  these  organs  we  have  another  important  agency,  the 
Post-office  Mission,  in  connection  with  the  publication  department. 
We  are  distributing  Unitarian  literature  at  home,  just  as  you  are  dis- 
tributing it  at  25  Beacon  Street. 

If  I  spoke  exclusively  of  Unitarianism  I  am  afraid  that  I  should 
make  my  statement  too  narrow.  I  will  say  that  Christianity  in  its 
best  interpretation  is  being  welcomed  by  our  students,  who  are  eager 
to  acquire  the  best  thought  of  the  twentieth  century.  But  I  want  to 
remind  you  emphatically  that  Christianity  is  being  welcomed  by  our 
new  generations,  not  because  of  its  profound  systematic  theology 
which  was  developed  in  the  past  centuries,  and  not  because  of  its 
mysterious  blending  with  the  philosophy  of  the  ancient  Greeks,  but 
because  of  the  simple  yet  sound  moral  teachings  of  Jesus,  which  is 
very  natural  and  easy  for  our  people  to  understand  and  apply.  Our 
people  are  born  with  rationalistic  tendencies  in  religious  matters. 
They  understand  the  pure  Christianity  of  Jesus  far  better  than  a 
complicated  theology. 

The  religion  of  our  people,  as  I  said  at  the  beginning,  is  insepara- 
ble from  morality.  Therefore,  it  is  impossible  to  introduce  any  re- 
ligion to  the  Japanese  only  through  the  ears:  it  must  be  introduced 
into  the  Japanese  head  and  heart  by  the  eyes  as  well.  A  truly 
virtuous  man,  one  who  is  burning  with  religious  zeal  and  is  an  illus- 
tration of  what  he  preaches, — such  a  one  will  have  a  great  influence 
among  our  people.    If  such  a  leader  were  to  come  to  us  or  arise 


529 

among  us,  we  would  be  ready  to  acclaim  him  as  a  saviour.    The 
fields  are  ripe,  we  need  husbandmen. 

Ours  is  the  Land  of  the  Rising  Sun.  May  it  be  the  sun  of  a  rea- 
sonable and  true  religion,  of  a  pure  morality,  of  a  Christianity  with- 
out priest  or  ritual,  enthroned  in  men's  souls,  active  in  good  works, 
and  held  in  the  spirit  of  perfect  liberty! 

Hymn,  "  O  Star  of  Truth,"  by  Minot  J.  Savage. 

Judge  Morton. — When  America  was  still  an  undiscovered  country 
and  when  London  was  an  unreclaimed  marsh  and  Paris  was  a  slum, 
there  were  wise  and  holy  men,  saints  and  prophets,  in  the  ancient 
East,  who  had  meditated  profoundly  upon  the  destiny  of  man,  on 
his  relations  to  a  Supreme  Being.  That  ancient  spirit  still  survives, 
and  there,  as  here,  there  are  those  who  teach  the  doctrines  of  truth 
and  charity  and  benevolence,  and  the  strengthening  of  bonds  be- 
tween men  of  all  nations,  persuasions,  and  creeds.  With  such, 
wherever  they  are  or  whatever  their  race  or  creed,  we  are  in  spiritual 
brotherhood. 

We  have  with  us  this  evening  several  gentlemen  from  India  whom 
I  shall  have  the  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you,  and  the  first  is  Professor 
Rau,  of  Calicut,  India,  who  will  speak  to  you  on  "  The  Ideals  of  the 
Brahmo-Somaj ." 


53° 


THE   IDEALS    OF  THE   BRAHMO-SOMAJ. 

BY  PROFESSOR  G.   SUBBA  RAU,  OF  CALICUT,  INDIA. 

It  is  becoming  fashionable  in  these  days  to  exalt  the  real  at  the 
expense  of  the  ideal.  We  live  in  a  real  world,  but  we  live  for  ideals, — 
for  an  ideal  world.  The  real  appears  and  vanishes,  the  ideal  abides. 
The  Christian  world  should  never  give  up  the  ideal,  for  instance, 
of  a  kingdom  of  heaven  upon  the  earth,  and  yet  that  ideal  is  not 
going  to  be  realized  in  ten  years  or  in  ten  centuries.  Ideals  grow 
upon  us.  They  are  perfect,  no  doubt,  in  the  consciousness  of  God; 
but  they  dawn  upon  us,  they  grow  upon  us,  and  they  show  them- 
selves more  and  more  in  the  consciousness  of  men  and  of  the  human 
race,  and  they  show  themselves  in  the  life  that  they  live.  And  yet 
as  ideals  they  are  eternal.  You  cannot  create  ideas;  you  can  assim- 
ilate them;  you  cannot  invent  them.  If  so,  what  shall  I  say  of  the 
ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  ?  Would  you  be  surprised  if  I  had  noth- 
ing very  surprising,  nothing  new,  to  present  in  the  name  of  the  ideals 
of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  ? 

The  Brahmo-Somaj  is  an  organization  which  is  comparatively 
new.  The  phrase  means  "The  Society  of  Worshippers  of  God," 
or,  simply,  "Theistic  Society";  and  it  may  be  regarded  as  dating 
from  the  year  1830,  when  its  founder,  the  great  Raja  Ram  Mohan 
Roy,  consecrated  the  first  temple  for  its  worship  in  Calcutta.  It 
is  therefore  comparatively  a  very  modern  movement,  but  the  ideals 
that  it  has  been  trying  to  hold  up  before  the  people  and  make  living 
in  their  lives,  they  are  not  modern,  they  are  ancient.  They  are  to  be 
seen  in  our  ancient  literature,  and  I  would  say  they  are  to  be  seen 
in  all  the  sacred  literature  of  the  world.  The  Brahmo-Somaj  ex- 
ists for  the  purpose  of  seeing  that  those  ideals  are  day  by  day  realized 
in  the  lives  of  the  people  of  India.  And,  if  I  am  to  give  you  any 
brief  idea  in  a  few  words  of  the  ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj,  per- 
haps I  could  do  no  better  than  to  take  four  alliterative  words, — 
"light,"  "liberty,"  "loyalty,"  "love." 


53i 

Light.  I  have  read  of  the  great  German  sage,  Goethe,  that  he 
died,  crying,  "Light,  more  light!"  We  in  the  Orient  have  been 
students  of  the  Light,  have  been  worshippers  of  the  Light  from  the 
earliest  times.  Five  thousand  years  ago,  according  to  Occidental 
scholars,  while  the  world  was  in  the  twilight  of  its  history,  while  the 
great  Greek  and  Roman  nations  were  yet  unborn,  the  sages  of  India 
were  singing  that  glorious  hymn  which  is  being  chanted  to  this  day 
by  every  Hindu  worshipper  in  his  daily  worship.  It  may  not  be 
very  expressive  to  you,  but  it  is  full  of  expression  to  the  people  of 
India  who  chant  it  day  by  day. 

"O  Thou  shining  One, 
Creator  of  all  things  that  are, 
We  meditate  upon  thy  effulgent  and  saving  glory. 
Do  thou,  then,  lighten  our  souls." 

Yes,  we  have  been  worshippers  of  the  light,  and  the  Brahmo- 
Somaj  has  only  taken  up  the  ancient  position,  and  is  holding  up  the 
light.  It  stands  for  the  light,  and  the  light,  mind  you,  comes  not  from 
the  east  only,  but  from  all  quarters,  and  the  Brahmo-Somaj  recog- 
nizes this  great  fact.  And  so  in  our  religious  movement  we  recog- 
nize the  prophets  of  all  lands  and  the  sacred  books  of  all  countries. 
We  honor  Jesus  equally  with  Buddha.  We  honor  Mohammed  and 
Zoroaster  alike,  and  indifferently  in  our  worship  we  use  the  Bha- 
gavad  Gita  and  the  Koran  and  the  Zend  Avesta.  And  you  will  find 
on  the  walls  of  many  of  our  places  of  worship  in  India  selections 
taken  from  the  sacred  scriptures  of  the  world. 

Liberty.  What  is  the  land  above  all  others  which  has  been  the 
cradle  of  religions  and  the  religious  life  of  whose  people  has  been 
practically  the  life  total  of  those  people  ?  India.  And  will  you  tell 
me,  shall  I  tell  you,  which  is  the  land  and  which  are  the  people  in 
which  and  among  whom  persecution  in  the  name  of  religion  has  been 
unknown  ?  I  will  just  for  a  moment  exclude  the  short  periods  under 
certain  unwise  Mohammedan  rulers.  Excluding  that  period,  India 
has  never  known  a  religious  persecution.  Tolerance,  liberty  of 
thought,  has  not  only  been  tolerated,  it  has  been  encouraged.  Three 
thousand  years  ago  we  have  records  of  religious  congresses  and  par- 
liaments held  in  the  courts  of  the  princes  of  Northern  India,  and  I 
have  regretted  to  find  that  in  the  proceedings  there  is  no  mention 


532 

of  any  delegates  from  Boston.  And  yet  the  meetings  were  held,  there 
is  no  doubt  about  it,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  delegation  was  not 
world-wide.  Yes,  liberty  has  been  the  great  principle  of  religious 
life  in  India. 

My  next  word  is  Loyalty.  Liberty  before  the  world,  loyalty  to 
the  light,  loyalty  to  the  light  that  I  see  in  my  soul.  Loyalty  has  been 
a  great  principle  of  our  religious  life,  the  principle  which  the  Brahmo- 
Somaj  has  taken  up  and  is  trying  to  make  living  in  the  lives  of  the 
people.  Loyalty  implies  law,  and  law  signifies  something  compelling 
loyalty. 

There  is  one  word  in  current  use  among  our  people  which  expresses 
this  fact  and  this  relation.  That  word  is  karma,  deed.  A  great  Ger- 
man scholar  somewhere  mentions  an  incident  in  the  course  of  his 
visit  to  India.  He  saw  a  man  who  was  born  blind.  He  asked  him 
to  what  he  thought  he  owed  the  misfortune.  The  man  coolly 
answered,  "Why,  it  must  be  the  result  of  some  wicked  deed  that  I 
did  in  my  past  life."  You  may  call  it  superstition,  you  may  call  it 
fatalism,  you  may  call  it  anything,  but  I  tell  you  there  is  something 
that  is  sublime  in  that  spirit  which  recognizes  that  there  is  nothing 
unjust,  that  the  universe  is  justice,  that,  as  we  sow,  so  we  reap,  and 
that,  although  we  do  not  know  exactly  how  or  where,  we  have  de- 
served what  we  have  got.  There  is  something  in  that.  It  does  not 
necessarily  mean  fatalism.  The  most  honored  book  of  the  Hindus, 
the  Bhagavad  Gita,  preaches  that;  and  yet  it  preaches  from  cover 
to  cover  the  great  doctrine  that  we  must  work,  toil  on,  without  regard 
for  consequences. 

In  one  of  the  ancient  Upanishads  a  profound  sentiment,  a  pro- 
found sentiment  of  a  dying  man,  was  expressed.  The  dying  man 
says: — 

"O  my  breath,  return  to  the  immortal  air!  O  my  body,  be  re- 
duced to  ashes!  But,  my  soul,  remember,  remember,  remember, 
thy  deeds." 

We  obey  the  law,  we  are  loyal  to  the  law;  but  we  recognize  that  it 
is  a  law  of  love,  not  a  retributive  law,  not  a  vengeful  law  that  pun- 
ishes and  damns  to  eternal  torment,  but  a  law  that  punishes  for  the 
sake  of  chastening  and  improving  and  uplifting.  It  is  a  law  of  love, 
a  law  that  is  the  expression  of  the  will  of  a  loving  father  and  mother. 
And  so  I  come  to  the  last  word, — Love. 


533 

Western  scholars  have  studied  a  great  deal  of  our  philosophy, 
but  there  is  one  thing  that,  on  the  whole,  they  have  not  been  able 
to  appreciate,  and  that  is  the  genuine,  the  real  religious  life  of  India. 
It  is  represented  by  that  word  love,  by  the  word  Bhakti  or  Pretna, 
which  means  devotion  or  love.  That  represents  the  essence  of  the 
religious  life  of  the  people  of  India. 

There  are  three  different  kinds  or  methods  of  culture  which  are 
prominently  seen  in  our  religious  life, — the  path  of  knowledge,  the 
path  of  love  and  devotion,  and  the  path  of  works  of  service.  The 
Brahmo-Somaj  takes  up  all  these,  wants  to  harmonize  them,  wants 
to  blend  them  together,  but  lends  its  emphasis  specially  to  love, 
to  devotion,  because  that  can  kindle  and  strengthen  knowledge  and 
work. 

We  are  not  satisfied  with  the  foliage  of  knowledge.  We  want  to 
see  the  fair  blossoms  of  love  and  devotion.  And  we  are  not  satis- 
fied even  with  that.  We  want  at  last  the  glorious  fruit  of  conse- 
crated and  devoted  service. 

These  four  words,  then,  "light,"  liberty,"  "loyalty,"  and  "love," 
may  be  taken  as  representing  in  some  way  the  ideals  which  have  been 
ours  and  which  the  Brahmo-Somaj  is  endeavoring  to  make  living  in 
the  lives  of  the  people  of  India. 

The  work  is  great.  300,000,000  people,  and  here  is  a  small  organ- 
ization seventy-five  years  old  which  aims  at  doing  the  grand  work 
of  uplifting  a  people  who  are  in  the  condition  which  perhaps  you  are 
somewhat  able  to  appreciate.  We  have  enlisted  in  the  Brahmo- 
Somaj  the  finest  intellect  of  the  land,  the  noblest  hearts,  the  most 
consecrated  and  self-denying  wills.  And  yet,  if  the  work  was  to  de- 
pend only  upon  the  members  of  this  organization  of  the  Brahmo- 
Somaj,  much  of  it  would  remain  undone.  I  am  glad  to  say  that  the 
ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  are  not  the  exclusive  property  now  of 
the  Brahmo-Somaj.  They  never  were,  and  they  have  been  more  and 
more  popularized.  They  are  in  the  air.  There  are  scores  of  asso- 
ciations and  thousands  of  individuals  who  are  working  along  these 
lines,  and  after  the  ideals  for  which  the  Brahmo-Somaj  has  stood 
for  seventy  years  and  more.  And  thus  the  work  speeds  on.  You 
will  not  be  surprised  that  the  work  is  still  great.  Only  think,  every 
member  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  is  a  devoted  missionary  and  min- 
ister.    We  have  very  few  churches  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj,  very  few 


534 

special  ministers  set  apart,  very  few  who  are  paid  for  the  work  of 
preaching.  Every  one  is  a  minister  and  a  missionary.  And  in  those 
few  cases  where  there  are  men  who  are  maintained  and  paid  in 
order  that  they  may  live  well,  they  get  just  a  subsistence  allowance 
in  due  accordance  with  the  ideals  of  ancient  India  of  the  religious  life. 
Yes,  all  of  us  are  working  like  that.  And  yet  in  a  land  which  is  in- 
habited by  300,000,0000  people  who  are  ground  down  by  the  double 
curse  of  poverty  and  ignorance,  who  have  the  disadvantage  of  a 
foreign  rule  which  aims  to  exploit  the  country  politically  and  eco- 
nomically at  a  time  when  the  country  is  in  a  great  industrial  depres- 
sion, when  legislation  continually  is  brought  in  for  the  purpose  of 
putting  down  our  industries,  our  manufactures,  in  a  country  where 
the  State  maintains  no  public  schools  and  where  education  to  the 
poor  is  a  luxury  beyond  their  reach,  in  a  country  where  there  are  the 
difficulties  of  many  languages  and  many  customs,  in  a  country  where 
bad  sanitation  and  poverty  conspire  together  to  bring  about  the 
annual  scourge  of  plague  which  carries  off  millions  of  people  some- 
times in  the  course  of  the  year, — in  such  a  country  as  that,  with  all 
its  political,  social,  educational,  and  religious  problems,  do  you  won- 
der that  those  who  have  the  ideals  of  the  Brahmo-Somaj  find  that 
they  have  work  to  do  all  the  days  of  the  year?  Yes,  and  they  cheer- 
fully do  it,  and  the  great  comfort  is  that  they  are  not  left  alone.  The 
Brahmo-Somaj  need  not  boast  and  does  not  boast  that  it  is  alone  in 
the  field.  It  represents  great  ideals,  but  those  ideals  are  in  pos- 
session of  the  people,  and  many  who  are  not  members  of  the  Brahmo- 
Somaj  are  still  working  exactly  for  the  same  ideas.  This  morning 
I  met  two  gentlemen,  countrymen  of  mine.  They  were  brought  up 
as  Christians,  and  I  am  a  heathen;  and,  conversing  with  them,  I 
found  that  after  all  there  was  no  difference  between  us,  my  ideals  and 
my  aspirations  were  theirs,  and  that  we  could  work  together  hand  to 
hand  and  shoulder  to  shoulder  for  the  common  good.  One  of  them, 
and  both  of  them  perhaps,  are  going  to  address  you.  Another 
gentleman  perhaps  will  address  you,  too,  who  professes  the  religion 
of  the  Prophet,  and  yet  whose  words  will  perhaps  reveal  no  differ- 
ence in  ideals  from  mine. 

And  so,  friends,  we  work  on,  work  on  and  hope,  because  in  a  world 
that  is  ordained  by  God,  so  long  as  we  are  working  for  ideals  that  are 
pure,  ideals  that  are  eternal,  we  may  be  sure  of  success.     I  have 


535 

detained  you  long;  but  may  I  tell  you  that  I  am  an  optimist?  In 
spite  of  all  troubles  ahead,  in  spite  of  all  dangers  and  difficulties  be- 
setting us  at  every  step  that  we  take,  I  always  feel  cheery.  It  may 
be  a  foolish  optimism,  but  it  is  an  optimism  that  I  cling  to  with  all 
my  heart.  And  I  love  to  dream;  and  shall  I  tell  you  that  one  of  my 
dreams  is  that  some  day,  not  very  far  off,  India,  my  ancient  land, 
will  take  an  honored,  a  respected,  and  a  self-respecting  place 
among  the  nations  of  the  world;  and  that  my  countrymen,  suffering 
no  more  from  oppression's  wrongs  or  from  the  proud  man's  con- 
tumely, will  live  together  in  amity  and  peace,  and  will  clarify  more 
and  more  the  light  which  is  the  law  of  love,  and  will  reflect  more  and 
more,  day  by  day,  upon  their  radiant  brows  the  glorious  image  of 
God? 

Judge  Morton. — I  have  the  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you  Mr. 
S.  L.  Joshi,  M.A.,  of  Bombay,  who  will  speak  to  us  on  "Religious 
Opportunities  in  India." 


536 


RELIGIOUS    OPPORTUNITIES    IN    INDIA. 

BY  S.    L.    JO  SHI,   OF   BOMBAY. 

My  friend,  Mr.  Rau,  has  already  presented  to  you  the  subject  of 
religion  in  India,  and  it,  therefore,  maybe  well  for  me  to  draw  your  at- 
tention to  the  same  subject,  first  of  all,  from  a  historic  point  of  view, 
in  order  that  you  may  be  able  to  appreciate  the  present  perspective. 
In  the  whole  history  of  literature  there  is  no  subject  so  fascinating 
.as  to  trace  the  course  of  religious  development  through  the  history 
of  India.  In  the  earliest  Hinduism  we  have  furnished  to  us  the 
philosophic  background  of  religion,  and  then,  as  we  go  through  cen- 
turies to  further  development,  we  notice  Buddhism  appearing  on 
the  scene,  first  as  a  protestant  revolt  against  priestcraft,  and  finally 
as  a  system  of  religion  which  has  given  to  India  its  best  ethical  code. 
From  the  days  of  Buddhism  on  to  the  times  when  the  conquering 
Mohammedans  poured  into  India,  a  great  religious  change  pre- 
sents itself  to  our  view.  And  the  great  contribution  that  Moham- 
medanism, in  spite  of  its  many  weaknesses,  has  made  to  the  relig- 
ious development  of  India,  was  the  supreme  emphasis  which  it  laid 
on  the  unity  of  the  Godhead.  And  so  we  find  that  "through  the 
ages  one  increasing  purpose  runs,"  and  I  hope  that  all  of  us  believe 
that  God  works  through  human  history  everywhere,  and  that  in 
India,  also,  God  has  been  preparing  the  ground  for  his  kingdom  by 
making  each  religious  thought  and  each  nation  a  contribution  to  it. 
In  the  days  of  the  decline  of  Mohammedanism,  or  rather  of  the  Mo- 
hammedan political  power  in  India,  we  find  that  there  was  a  general 
confusion  of  religious  thought,  and  yet  out  of  the  embers  of  religious 
■confusion  there  rose  up  great  religious  prophets  and  teachers  with 
sublime  and  inspiring  messages  which  they  brought  to  the  varied 
races  of  India.  It  was  just  about  this  time  also  that  we  noticed  a 
contact  of  India  with  the  nations  of  Europe.     It  is  admitted  that  first 


537 

of  all  this  contact  with  Europe  was  primarily  a  commercial  contact. 
Nevertheless,  through  commerce  we  were  brought  into  close  touch 
with  the  principles  of  western  civilization,  and  in  the  struggle  for 
political  supremacy  which  followed  among  the  different  nations  of 
Europe  we  find  England  surviving  and  ultimately  holding  sway  in 
India.  Those  of  us  who  know  the  story  of  Christianity  in  India  and 
the  contribution  it  has  made  for  the  building  up  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  may  not  probably  have  heard  the  different  aspects  of  Chris- 
tianity in  India.  Before  speaking  of  the  great  work  that  has  beer* 
achieved  by  the  different  Christian  agencies  that  are  working  in 
India,  I  should  like  to  point  out  to  you  some  of  the  weak  points  that 
are  responsible  for  the  non-achievement  of  results  that  might  other- 
wise have  been  attained. 

First  and  foremost  we  have  this  difficulty:  that  Christianity  has 
been  associated  in  India  with  the  name  of  a  political  power, — a  po- 
litical power  which  has  not  always  commended  itself  to  the  people 
of  India  as  a  Christian  nation;  and  so  in  that  respect  the  cause  of 
Christianity  as  such  has  suffered. 

Another  reason  why  Christianity  has  not  appealed  more  effec- 
tively to  the  most  intelligent  people  in  India  is  that  Christianity  has 
appeared  on  the  scene  not  in  its  united  form,  but  as  a  house  divided 
against  itself.  Just  as  we  have  in  India  our  caste  systems  and  our 
various  sectional  differences  among  the  Hindus,  and  we  have  among 
us  the  Mohammedans,  so  Christianity  also  comes  to  us  with  its  varied 
garbs  of  religious  interpretation  and  religious  thought.  This  divi- 
sion has  been  a  source  of  great  weakness  to  the  growth  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion  in  India.  Moreover,  according  to  the  present  condi- 
tions there  is  another  source  of  weakness,  and  that  is  that  an  ecclesi- 
astical department  is  maintained  by  the  British  government  in  India 
at  the  cost  of  the  Hindu  tax-payer  who  has  no  faith  in  Christianity. 
I  simply  refer  to  this,  not  as  a  political  grievance,  but  because  of  its 
ethical  values.  And  you  must  remember  that  the  leaders  of  relig- 
ious thought  in  India  look  upon  all  political  and  sociological  ques- 
tions from  the  purely  ethical  point  of  view.  It  is,  therefore,  from  the 
ethical  point  of  view  that  we  refer  to  these  political  problems  in  rela- 
tion to  Christianity. 

With  regard  to  the  achievements  of  Christian  missions  in  India, 
while  I  have  pointed  out  some  of  the  weaknesses,  it  would  be  unfair 


53« 

to  leave  the  story  half  told.  The  whole  story  of  Christian  missions 
in  India  reads  like  a  fable.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  we  notice  a  group  of  devoted  men  and  women  working  against 
great  obstacles  for  an  ideal  in  which  they  heartily  believed.  Dur- 
ing the  course  of  a  hundred  years  we  notice  that  movement  rising 
from  a  small  beginning  until  at  last  it  covers  almost  the  whole  country. 
And,  while  it  may  be  that  many  of  us  differ  one  from  the  other  in  re- 
gard to  the  dogmatic  basis  of  the  various  sectarian  differences  of 
Christianity,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  ultimate  value  of  Christian 
missions  in  India  will  be  measured  not  by  statistics,  but  by  the  actual 
rendering  of  service  to  the  needs  of  humanity.  It  is  only  by  that 
standard  that  we  can  gain  ultimately  the  true  value  of  a  religion,  and 
with  this  test  I  am  pretty  certain  that  all  of  you  will  agree  with  me 
that  Christian  missions  in  spite  of  all  their  weaknesses  have  been  a 
source  of  great  blessing  to  India.  Consider  the  subject  of  foreign 
missions  in  India  from  the  purely  utilitarian  point  of  view,  if  I  may 
use  that  term.  We  notice  that,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  the 
Christian  missionary  in  India  was  working  hand  in  hand  with  the 
progress  of  general  events.  For  instance,  when  the  great  Scotch- 
man, Dr.  Guss,  comes  to  India  and  discovers  that  the  opportunity 
had  come  in  the  development  of  India  for  the  introduction  of  the 
English  language  and  of  English  methods  of  education,  we  see  that 
with  statesmanlike  genius  and  prophetic  insight  he  worked  night  and 
day  with  the  object  of  interesting  his  fellow-countrymen  in  the  work 
of  starting  English  schools  and  colleges  in  India.  And  the  ground 
that  he  prepared  in  England  and  Scotland  for  that  work  was  ulti- 
mately cultivated  also  by  the  efforts  of  Lord  Macaulay,  and  the  re- 
sult was  that  we  had  the  great  Indian  University  system  established 
there. 

Take,  again,  the  case  of  medical  missions.  There  was  a  great  need 
of  modern  methods  of  medicine  felt  in  India,  and  the  missionary  was 
the  first  to  discover  that  women  trained  as  medical  missionaries  could 
render  the  most  efficient  service  along  that  line.  And  so  we  have  a 
large  number  of  devoted  women  coming  over  into  India  from  America 
and  from  England  and  from  Germany  to  render  this  much-needed 
service.  But  during  the  nineteenth  century  a  greater  revolution  has 
taken  place  than  this  revolution  in  the  realm  of  religion  or  of  edu- 
cation.   It  is  greater  because  it  has  affected  the  material  happiness 


539 

of  the  largest  number  of  people  in  the  Orient.  You  have  not  all  for- 
gotten the  time  when  the  steam-engine  was  invented,  and  how  the 
invention  of  the  steam  engine  ultimately  affected  the  different  methods 
of  industry  in  England  as  well  as  on  the  continent  of  Europe  and  in 
America.  You  also  remember  the  story  of  the  labor  riots,  how  large 
masses  of  the  laboring  classes  were  in  revolt  against  the  introduction 
of  machinery,  and  against  the  introduction  of  methods  that  were 
likely  to  subvert  their  methods  of  earning  a  living.  This  same  in- 
dustrial revolution,  which  was  not  welcomed  heartily  by  the  labor- 
ing classes  of  the  Western  nations,  has  been  carried  with  the  expan- 
sion of  the  British  flag  to  the  Orient.  And  there  in  India  we  have  the 
industrial  revolution  presented  to  us  in  a  conflict  more  deadly  than 
was  ever  presented  on  the  battlefield  in  human  history.  When  it 
is  remembered  that  within  the  last  twenty-five  years  more  than  35,- 
000,000  people  have  died  in  my  country  for  want  of  bread,  you  will 
realize  the  enormous  gravity  of  the  situation  and  the  large  extent  to 
which  it  affects  the  people  of  India. 

This  whole  subject  of  famines  in  India  is  at  bottom  an  economic 
problem,  and  is  indicative  of  the  keenness  of  the  industrial  struggle 
that  has  come  into  the  country  and  has  created  a  field  for  human 
service  the  like  of  which  was  never  known  in  history  before.  And 
you  and  I  who  are  interested  in  the  building  up  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  are  bound  to  consider  this  much-needed  field  of  human  ser- 
vice. There  is  no  service  so  important  as  this  one  presented  in 
India  to-day,  where  men  and  women  have  been  practically  deprived 
of  their  methods  of  earning  a  living,  have  turned  in  their  hope- 
lessness to  agriculture  just  to  eke  out  a  living,  until  at  last  the 
land  is  overrun  with  men  who  by  the  primitive  methods  of  agri- 
culture cannot  get  enough  return,  and  then  we  have  those  periodic 
famines  of  which  you  hear  so  much.  Of  course,  it  is  easy  to 
have  announced  by  an  official  person  a  great  famine  in  India, 
and  then  to  raise  subscriptions  to  feed  the  starving  people.  But  it 
is  much  more  important  to  study  the  whole  situation  from  a  purely 
economic  point  of  view,  and  to  remove  the  causes  which  bring 
about  this  periodical  famine.  And  it  is  to  the  consideration  of 
these  great  problems  that  I  take  this  opportunity  of  inviting  your 
attention. 

It  seems  to  me  that  there  is  no  country  in  the  world  to-day  which 


54° 

offers  such  a  fine  field  for  human  service  as  India  in  its  present  in- 
dustrial trouble.  This  trouble  of  which  I  have  spoken,  however  im- 
portant it  may  be,  has  also  its  political  and  other  phases  allied  to  it, 
into  which  it  is  not  possible  to  enter  here  to-night,  but  I  can  only  say 
this,  that  it  is  to  my  mind  the  greatest  field  of  human  service.  I  am 
reminded  of  the  time  when  Nehemiah  was  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
trying  to  rebuild  the  walls  of  that  city,  and  he  discovered  that  it  was 
an  immense  task;  yet  he  called  the  people  together,  and  they  ulti- 
mately decided  upon  a  very  simple  scheme.  And  Nehemiah  said, 
"Let  every  man  build  that  portion  of  the  wall  which  is  next  to  his 
own  door."  That  hits  the  nail  on  the  head.  Every  one  of  us  has 
an  individual  duty  in  the  building  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  If 
we  really  claim  to  be  followers  of  the  humble  Nazarene  and  to  direct 
our  lives  by  the  great  immortal  principles  which  are  laid  down  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  then  it  is  our  duty  as  Christian  men  and 
women  to  study  the  problems  which  are  vitally  affecting  the  ma- 
terial interests  of  enormous  masses  of  the  population  in  the  Orient, 
and  to  do  the  needful  thing  in  rendering  distress  less  hurtful  and  in 
promoting  the  material  prosperity  of  those  countries.  If  there  is 
opportunity  for  service  wanted  by  those  who  are  interested  in  the 
building  up  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  in  this  world,  I  say  again  that 
India  offers  the  most  splendid  opportunity.  Apart  from  the  indus- 
trial problem  take  our  social  problem.  A  great  deal  of  work  lies 
before  us  along  that  line.  Our  women  have  to  be  educated  and  up- 
lifted, our  lower  caste  people  have  to  be  uplifted.  The  question  of 
education  also  is  a  very  supreme  question  of  the  moment.  After 
one  hundred  and  fifty  years  of  British  influence  in  India  it  is  not  at  all 
pleasant  to  know  that  out  of  every  one  hundred  people  there  are  only 
eight  people  who  are  able  to  read  and  write  even  their  own  lan- 
guage. And  where  we  are  confronted  by  an  illiterate  mass  of  men  and 
women  it  is  not  an  easy  task  to  instil  into  their  minds  ideas  of  prog- 
ress and  of  adjustment  to  the  new  economic  life  that  has  come  into 
the  country.  Take  the  question  of  sanitation,  the  want  of  which 
is  responsible  for  decimation  of  millions  of  people,  because  the  peo- 
ple have  not  had  time  and  opportunity  to  study  modern  methods  of 
sanitation.  There  is  another  field  for  human  service.  Men  and 
women  in  this  country  who  are  willing  to  sacrifice  themselves  and 
their  lives  for  the  service  of  humanity  have  in  India  a  splendid  chance 


54i 

where  by  their  enthusiasm  and  self-sacrificing  service  they  can  help 
to  build  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Judge  Morton. — I  have  the  pleasure  of  presenting  to  you  Mr. 
Barakatullah,  of  the  Mohammedan  faith,  who  will  address  us  on 
'' Liberalism  in  India." 


542 


LIBERAL  MOHAMMEDANISM  IN  INDIA. 

BY   M.    BARAKATULLAH,    OF    BHOPAL. 

p^For  nineteen  centuries  you  have  been  praying,  "Thy  kingdom 
come,"  and  to-day  I  realize  that  the  beginning  of  that  kingdom  of 
God  has  already  set  in,  for  I  represent  a  religion  which  has  been  least 
understood  and  most  misrepresented  in  Western  lands.  In  fact, 
the  religion  of  Islam,  which  is  commonly  called  the  Mohammedan 
religion,  was  like  the  Ishmaelites,  whose  hand  was  against  everybody 
and  everybody's  hand  was  against  them.  But  to-day  I  have  the  great 
pleasure  to  address  an  audience  of  Christian  people  as  a  Mohamme- 
dan. The  religion  founded  by  the  Prophet  Mohammed  is  really 
called  Islam.  Islam  means  "resignation  to  the  will  of  God  alone, 
and  not  to  any  other  will."  Now  how  to  know  the  will  of  God? 
We  believe  that  the  power  behind  the  appearances  is  a  constant  mind 
which  has  been  working  through  all  the  universe  with  a  design, 
therefore  this  whole  universe  is  nothing  but  the  manifestation  of  the 
will  of  God.  Man  stands  as  a  higher  manifestation  of  the  will  of 
the  Deity  because  man  possesses  will,  accompanied  with  rational  con- 
science, and  the  superman,  or  the  perfect  man,  is  the  highest  mani- 
festation of  the  will  of  the  Deity.  A  perfect  man  is  a  link  between 
the  infinite  and  the  finite.  Therefore,  the  superman,  or  the  perfect 
man,  is  himself  the  embodiment  of  the  will  of  God.  His  word  is 
the  word  of  God,  and  his  will  is  the  will  of  God.  And,  therefore, 
in  Islam  we  have  five  articles  of  faith  which  will  explain  to  you  the 
meaning  of  the  will  of  God,  and  how  it  is  obeyed  by  the  followers 
of  the  Prophet  of  Arabia. 

The  first  article  of  the  faith  in  Islam  is  the  belief  in  God,  who  is 
one  and  eternal,  and  who  exists  by  himself  and  sustains  the  whole 
universe. 

The  second  article  is  the  belief  in  the  angels;  that  is  to  say,  pure 
spirits  which  are  agencies  for  good,  and  help  humanity  in  its  up- 


543 

ward  march  spiritually.  This  means,  in  other  words,  that  this  uni- 
verse is  not  only  the  visible  part  alone,  but  there  is  another  part  which 
is  called  the  unseen,  the  spiritual  world.  Some  people  might  say  that 
there  is  no  spiritual  world,  and  it  is  through  our  imagination  alone 
that  we  believe  that  there  is  a  soul  and  a  spiritual  world. 

Here  I  should  like  to  explain  myself  to  you  through  a  parable 
which  is  given  by  a  Persian  poet  called  Jalaludeen.  He  says  that 
a  little  child  in  a  room  was  informed  that  outside  there  was  a  great 
universe  in  which  there  were  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  stars,  and  the 
earth  with  its  continents,  oceans,  mountains,  and  gardens,  the  mineral 
kingdom,  vegetable  kingdom,  animal  kingdom,  and  man.  And  the 
child,  having  not  seen  it  with  his  five  senses,  would  deny  the  exist- 
ence of  such  a  thing.  So  the  inspired  man  says:  "This  is  the  likeness 
of  the  people  who  only  depend  upon  that  world  which  is  sensible 
and  which  is  perceived  through  their  senses.  They  deny  the  exist- 
ence of  the  spiritual  world." 

The  third  article  of  our  faith  is  the  belief  in  the  revealed  Book. 
Revelation  is  one:  it  produces  the  same  effect  in  all  minds  and  all 
climes.  According  to  the  Islamic  faith  the  revealed  books  of  all 
religions  are  true  in  their  origin,  and  a  man  cannot  be  a  Mohammedan 
without  believing  in  all  the  revealed  books.  But  how  can  one  distin- 
guish the  revealed  book  from  the  non-revealed?  The  character- 
istic of  the  revealed  word  is  that  it  imparts  spiritual  life,  and  in  spite 
of  all  resistance  prevails.  Just  to  give  you  an  instance  from  the 
Bible,  Jesus  says,  "Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  my  word 
shall  not  pass  away";  that  is  to  say,  the  revealed  word  is  destined 
to  prevail. 

The  fourth  article  of  faith  is  the  belief  in  all  the  prophets.  We 
make  no  limitation,  we  make  no  distinction,  among  the  prophets  of 
God.  They  are  all  one  because  spiritually  they  belong  to  the  same 
realm,  to  the  same  region.  The  Spirit  of  God  speaks  to  them,  and  that 
Spirit  is  one.  Therefore,  he  who  believes  in  the  Prophet  Moham- 
med, also  believes  in  all  prophets.  Indeed,  the  Koran  says,  "There 
is  no  country  where  God  has  not  sent  a  prophet."  Therefore,  all 
these  religions,  the  great  religions  of  the  world,  were  revealed  relig- 
ions. But  why  should  we  require  so  many  prophets  ?  In  this  world 
you  will  find  that  there  is  day  and  there  is  night.  The  time  comes 
when  materialistic  night  prevails.     The  majority  of  the  people  will 


544 

become  materialistic.  They  have  no  regard  for  higher  things.  They 
believe  that  the  enjoyments  of  this  world  alone  are  the  realities.  But 
at  such  a  time  it  is  necessary  that  the  sun  of  spirituality  shall  rise 
again,  and  it  is  the  rule  that,  whenever  a  new  prophet  is  born,  that  is 
the  daybreak  of  spirituality.  When  a  prophet  comes,  he  unites  the 
scattered,  he  removes  animosities,  he  makes  strangers  as  brothers 
and  sisters.    So,  according  to  our  belief,  all  the  prophets  are  one. 

These  prophets  have  their  peculiarities  on  the  physical  plane,  they 
adopt  different  methods  in  producing  the  same  effect,  and  the  result 
is  that  every  prophet  gives  a  help  to  humanity  in  its  march  towards 
the  spiritual.  On  the  physical  plane  the  prophets  are  men  like  our- 
selves, but  on  the  spiritual  plane  they  are  very  high.  In  fact,  even 
on  the  physical  plane  their  bodies  are  so  fine  and  so  vibrate  on  the 
spiritual  plane  that  they  can  become  a  link  between  the  spiritual 
world  and  the  material  world. 

The  fifth  article  of  faith  is  the  faith  in  the  last  day,  or  what  we  would 
call  in  the  Western  language  the  advent  of  the  millennium,  or  the 
kingdom  of  God  on  earth.  This  is  the  last  article  of  the  faith  of 
Islam.  Now  how  this  kingdom  of  God  will  be  realized  is  given 
by  the  same  poet  in  the  form  of  a  parable.  The  poet  says  that  there 
were  four  men  gathered  together:  one  was  a  Greek,  another  was  a 
Persian,  a  third  man  was  a  Turk,  and  the  fourth  was  an  Arab.  Unto 
these  four  men  some  one  gave  a  coin.  The  Arab  rose  and  said  that 
he  would  like  to  buy  ineb  with  that  coin.  The  Persian  protested  and 
said  that  he  would  like  to  buy  ozum  with  it.  The  Turk  said,  No,  I 
would  like  to  buy  angoor  with  that  coin.  The  Greek,  in  turn,  rose 
and  protested,  and  said  that  he  should  buy  staphile  with  it.  Then, 
the  poet  says,  a  man  comes  who  knows  all  these  four  languages,  and 
takes  the  coin  from  their  hand  and  buys  a  basket  of  grapes  and 
places  it  before  them,  and  they  are  satisfied.  So  all  these  differences 
that  exist  in  this  world  will  continue,  but,  when  the  kingdom  of  God 
will  be  realized,  it  will  be  realized  in  this  way,  that  the  misunderstand- 
ings will  be  removed,  and  we  will  find  that  we  are  one,  brothers  and 
sisters. 

Now  you  may  always  have  heard  that  Islam  is  synonymous  with 
warfare,  but  that  is  not  the  tenet  of  the  Prophet.  It  is  a  hard  place 
only  to  defend  one's  self;  and  so  you  will  find  among  all  the  followers 
of  religion  that  people  have  deviated  from  the  right  faith,  even  so  did 


545 

the  followers  of  the  Prophet.    For  their  transgressions  you  cannot 
blame  their  religion. 

There  are  other  points  which  are  also  brought  against  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Prophet.  For  example,  they  say  that  Islam  puts  a  pre- 
mium upon  polygamy.  But,  if  the  scholars  were  to  be  set  to  study 
the  writings  of  the  Prophet,  they  would  realize  that  Islam  teaches 
monogamy.  A  reformer  tries  to  reform  a  custom  gradually,  and  he 
appeals  to  human  conscience.  There  is  a  tradition  of  the  Prophet 
in  which  the  Prophet  says  that  a  man  having  two  wives,  if  he  were 
to  incline  to  one  of  them  more  than  the  other,  he  will  rise  on  the  day 
of  judgment  with  half  of  his  body  lifeless.  That  means  that  one 
should  have  one  wife.  By  treating  these  points,  I  wanted  to  call  to 
your  attention  that  we  have  lived  in  separation  for  centuries,  but,  as 
the  kingdom  of  God  is  drawing  near  and  is  about  to  be  established, 
we  will  see  that  these  differences  will  disappear  and  we  will  all  be- 
come as  brothers  and  sisters. 

Judge  Morton. — I  cannot  suffer  this  meeting  to  close  without  ex- 
pressing to  the  gentlemen  to  whom  we  have  listened  our  grateful 
appreciation  of  their  interesting  and  eloquent  addresses,  nor  without 
expressing  the  wish  that,  as  they  travel  homeward,  a  kind  Providence 
will  attend  them  and  bring  them  in  safety  to  their  journey's  end. 

We  will  close  the  service  by  singing  the  Hymn  "Forward  into 
Light." 

After  the  singing  of  the  hymn,  the  benediction  was  pronounced  by 
Rev.  Thomas  Van  Ness,  minister  of  the  Second  Church,  as  follows: — 

Now  may  the  spirit  of  love,  the  spirit  of  truth,  the  Eternal  Spirit 
of  God,  be  and  abide  with  us  all  and  speak  to  our  hearts  of  His 
everlasting  peace.    Amen. 


546 


DEPARTMENT  OF  WOMAN'S  WORK. 

Held  under  the  auspices  of  the  National  Alliance  of  Unitarian 
and  Other  Liberal  Christian  Women,  at  Channing  and  Ford  Halls, 
Wednesday,  September  25,  at  3.30  p.m. 

As  at  other  meetings  of  the  week,  the  attendance  at  this  session 
was  overwhelming,  and  Channing  Hall,  advertised  as  the  place  of 
meeting,  could  only  accommodate  an  overflow,  the  main  audience 
being  transferred  to  a  larger  hall  in  the  vicinity.  Special  seats  were 
held  for  foreign  guests,  and  every  foot  of  standing  room  was  eagerly 
sought  by  Alliance  members.  The  speakers  were  chiefly  the  women 
who  had  come  as  delegates  from  other  countries.  Miss  Emma  C. 
Low,  president  of  the  National  Alliance,  presided,  and  with  her 
on  the  platform  were  grouped  the  venerable  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe, 
of  Boston,  Mrs.  Judith  W.  Andrews,  the  first  president  of  the  Alli- 
ance, Mrs.  S.  E.  Hooper,  so  long  the  stanch  bulwark  of  this  society, 
Miss  Lilian  F.  Clarke,  a  well-known  power  in  the  Post-office  Mis- 
sion, Lady  Bowring,  of  Liverpool,  England,  Miss  Mary  E.  Rich- 
mond from  Wellington,  New  Zealand,  Miss  D.  Van  Eck,  of  Holland, 
Rev.  Miss  Gertrude  von  Petzold,  of  Leicester,  our  only  woman 
minister  in  England,  and  officers  of  the  Alliance.  In  her  opening 
remarks  Miss  Low  outlined  and  explained  the  work  of  the  Alliance, 
its  beginnings  and  its  accomplishments,  and  the  special  functions 
of  the  different  departments.  Emphasis  was  laid  on  what  the  Alli- 
ance had  done  for  Unitarian  women  in  strengthening  their  faith  and 
in  spreading  a  wider  knowledge  of  it  abroad.  The  work  of  the  Alli- 
ance in  the  South  was  given  a  prominent  place. 

Miss  Van  Eck,  of  Holland,  was  then  introduced. 


547 


THE    RELIGIOUS    WORK    OF    LIBERAL    DUTCH 
WOMEN,  HOLLAND. 

BY  MISS  DAATJE  VAN  ECK,  LEIDEN. 

The  Dutch  Postal  Mission  Committee  and  the  Sunday-school 
(van  den  Nederlandsche  Protestantenbond),  our  league  of  Liberals, 
whom  I  have  the  honor  to  represent,  send  you  their  greetings.  We 
were  very  much  pleased  indeed  to  receive  your  invitation,  and  I 
hope  our  work  will  profit  a  great  deal  by  my  visit  to  America. 

The  blessing  to  feel  that  we  are  one,  notwithstanding  the  difference 
in  character,  talents,  and  country,  the  delight  to  feel  that  we  are  all 
of  one  family, — to  look  into  your  friendly  faces  and  hear  your  gener- 
ous welcome, — fills  my  heart  with  joy. 

I  suppose  it  will  interest  you  to  hear  something  of  the  religious 
work  of  liberal  women  in  Holland,  so  I  wish  to  divide  my  subject 
into  three  parts, — Sunday  school,  women  teachers  of  religion,  and 
Postal  Mission  work.  I  will  mention  only  our  social  religious  district 
nursing  and  Toynbee  work,  our  institutions  for  fallen  women  and 
neglected  children.  Ladies  are  not  often  found  in  committees,  but 
you  can  find  them  everywhere  at  work  for  the  little  ones  and  the 
poor.  The  Dutch  woman  is  a  hard  worker,  convinced  that  the 
highest  interest  of  the  people  proceed  from  the  development  of  the 
religious  life.  Although  we  are  a  very  critical  people,  our  women 
are  more  religious  than  theological,  and  find  their  particular  task 
in  practical  religious  work. 

Our  Sunday-school  is  quite  independent  of  the  church,  and  unites 
the  children  of  Remonstrant,  Baptist,  Lutheran,  and  Liberal 
Dutch  Reformed  parents,  Sunday  after  Sunday.  Our  official  head 
is  the  Protestantenbond  Sunday-school  Committee;  its  president  is 
the  chairman  of  the  biennial  meetings,  and  the  secretary  is  always 
ready  to  help  the  lonely  sisters.  This  committee  manages  the 
central  library  for  teachers,  and  publishes  a  calendar  and  pictures 
which  are  distributed  to  the  children.     The  first  Dutch  Sunday- 


548 

school  was  opened  in  1805,  but  not  until  i860  was  the  liberal  Sunday- 
school  established  as  it  is  at  present.  Here  women  take  a  foremost 
place,  and  religious  instruction  is  given  to  35,000  children,  in  238 
schools,  by  more  than  1,000  teachers,  mostly  young  ladies.  In  the 
villages  the  minister  has  often  to  conduct  the  Sunday-school  with 
his  wife  and  daughters,  while  in  the  towns  it  is  generally  in  the  hands 
of  ladies  only. 

We  hold  our  Sunday-schools  in  the  school-houses,  where  we 
gather  the  children  from  seven  to  twelve  years.  We  pray  and  sing 
with  them,  and  tell  them  simple  stories  of  children  as  they  are  or 
ought  to  be,  lessons  from  nature,  flowers,  and  animals,  the  sun  and 
stars,  fairy-tales  and  biographies,  and  last,  but  not  least,  the  best 
stories  of  the  Bible  fit  for  children.  Though  we  never  fear  truth, 
we  must  not  forget  that  we  have  first  to  tell  our  children  of  God,  our 
Father  in  heaven,  before  we  teach  them  the  mysteries  of  science  or 
ethics. 

The  parents  are  regularly  visited,  and  we  have  a  festival  at  Christ- 
mas, with  a  tree  or  stereopticon. 

Every  week  or  fortnight  we  have  our  Sunday-school  teachers' 
meeting,  one  of  the  teachers  writes  on  the  subject  for  the  next  Sun- 
day, and  afterward  we  have  a  discussion.  We  work  very  methodi- 
cally, using  a  list  of  subjects  which  forms  a  course  of  six  years'  work. 
In  Leyden,  where  I  am  the  president,  we  have  20  to  25  teachers 
and  about  500  children.  We  have  libraries  for  pupils,  and  our  special 
Sunday-school  holiday  home  for  weak  children. 

In  our  government  schools  no  Scripture  lesson  is  taught,  as  parents 
wish  to  be  free.  Many  a  mother,  without  forgetting  the  happy  ex- 
ceptions, does  not  know  how  to  talk  to  her  little  ones  about  the  best 
and  highest.  If  you  have  some  gift  of  telling,  if  you  love  little  chil- 
dren, if  you  feel  with  all  your  heart  that  the  gospel  of  love  and  faith 
is  the  best  thing  in  the  whole  world  you  can  give  them,  then  you  will 
be  able  to  overcome  the  difficulties,  which  are,  above  all,  not  to  be 
uninteresting  and  not  to  spoil  young,  tender  hearts. 

God  forgive  us  our  trespasses!  Are  not  the  influences  in  the  first 
years  of  our  life  the  strongest  of  all?  After  the  children  leave  the 
Sunday-school  at  twelve  years,  they  receive  religious  instruction  from 
the  minister  until  they  are  eighteen  or  nineteen  years  of  age,  when 
they  are  confirmed. 


549 

Although  we  have  no  women  ministers,  there  are  a  few  women 
studying  theology  at  our  universities,  but  they  are  not  admitted  as  a 
minister  in  any  church  in  Holland  except  in  the  Baptizer  community 
(Mennonites).  This  exclusion  is,  however,  but  a  question  of  time. 
There  are,  however,  women  teachers  who  give  religious  lessons  to 
children  and  young  people  over  twelve  years,  sometimes  to  assist 
the  minister  and  sometimes  independently  appointed  by  the  Protes- 
tantenbond.  Our  mission  house  in  Leyden  was  erected  by  Miss 
Emilie  Knappert,  a  lady  teacher  who  ranks  first  among  Unitarian 
women  workers.  The  principal  here  is  Miss  Snellen,  another 
teacher  who  gives  all  her  time  and  strength  to  this  work.  Miss 
Mossel,  of  Amsterdam,  gives  us  our  excellent  Sunday-school  periodi- 
cal, Vrij  en  Vroom.  The  teachers  have  to  pass  an  examination  by 
the  Protestantenbond.  They  have  to  learn  two  foreign  languages, 
French  and  English  or  German,  knowledge  of  the  Bible,  history 
of  Christianity  in  Holland,  our  creed,  and  ethics  and  philosophy.  It 
is  paid  service,  which  is  not  the  case  with  Postal  Mission  and  Sun- 
day-school work.  Most  of  our  Unitarians  still  belong  to  the  Dutch 
Reformed  Church;  and,  as  the  majority  in  this  church  is  orthodox, 
we  are  continually  engaged  in  a  terribly  bitter  struggle.  We 
ladies  look  after  the  children  and  visit  the  families,  but  the 
teachers  also  do  the  work  of  the  minister  in  orthodox  communi- 
ties and  in  lonely  places.  They  are  allowed  to  preach  to  children 
and  young  people,  and  also  in  the  hall  of  the  Protestantenbond 
and  in  Rev.  Mr.  Hugenholtz's  Free  Congregation. 

We  in  Leyden  owe  much  to  Professor  Oort.  I  have  preached  my 
sermons  all  over  the  country,  and  given  evening  lectures  in  the  inter- 
est of  religion  and  peace,  on  the  "Postal  Mission,"  "Education  and 
Peace,"  "War  is  against  our  Christian  Principles." 

Our  Postal  Mission  work  came  to  us  straight  from  our  English 
friends,  and  to  them  from  Miss  Sally  Ellis,  our  mutual  foremother. 
God  bless  her!  You  see  we  are  all  of  one  family.  We  appreciate 
very  much  the  gift  Mr.  Wendte  sent  us  last  year,  by  which  we  saw 
that  you  acknowledge  your  grandchild.  There  were  many  among 
us  who  doubted  the  wisdom  of  Postal  Mission  work  among  our 
people,  as  the  Dutch  are  rather  reserved.  However,  in  October, 
1895,  we  had  a  meeting  in  Leyden,  and  the  work  was  created,  the 
child  was  born.     Three  ladies,  myself  included,  adopted  the  child. 


55° 

We  always  called  our  work  our  daughter, — not  a  bad  name  at  all,  be- 
cause it  expresses  very  well  its  relation  to  our  lives.  Those  first 
months  when  we  started  the  enterprise  I  look  back  upon  with  delight. 

Does  it  interest  you  to  know  our  method  of  work  ?  We  advertise 
in  different  papers:  "What  Free  Christians  believe.  Whoever 
wishes  to  read  about  this  can  apply  to  one  of  the  following  ad- 
dresses," etc.  How  delighted  we  were  at  the  first  requests!  How 
eagerly  the  letters  were  read  and  studied!  We  looked  forward  to 
every  post.  We  did  not  wait  till  we  were  asked,  "How  many?" 
but  from  the  opposite  side  of  the  canal  the  number  was  called  out. 
The  letters  came  in  great  numbers, — five,  ten,  twenty  every  week. 
We  were  very  glad;  but  it  was  almost  too  much  for  the  inexpe- 
rienced foster-mothers,  and,  however  great  their  joy,  they  could  not 
help  complaining  of  the  prosperous  growth  of  their  daughter,  as 
in  August  one  complains  of  the  warmth  of  the  sun,  however  dearly 
beloved.  We  could  hardly  keep  pace  with  her,  and  she  outgrew  all 
her  clothes;  that  is  to  say,  there  were  not  books  enough  to  meet  the 
demand.  Happily,  the  Protestantenbond  supplied  our  wants,  and 
in  two  years  the  workers  had  increased  to  six,  two  men  and  four 
women.  Our  work  is  not  divided  into  districts,  but  people  wishing 
our  literature  can  apply  to  the  nearest  worker  at  Leyden  or  Amster- 
dam or  in  any  other  part  of  the  country.  The  books  and  pamphlets 
are  sent  by  parcel  post  and  may  be  kept  one  month,  when  they  are 
returned  and  sent  out  again.     Our  library  contains  over  700  books. 

Religious  books  and  sermons  are  most  desired,  and  I  send  out  over 
1,000  of  them  yearly.  The  Postal  Mission  Committee  has  despatched 
over  35,000  books  and  pamphlets,  which  means  11,664  parcels  of 
literature.  Our  books  find  their  way  all  over  our  country  and  into 
Belgium  and  to  America. 

In  1 90 1  the  London  Central  Postal  Mission  Committee  sent  us  a 
cordial  invitation  to  attend  the  Mission  meeting  connected  with 
the  First  International  Congress.  I  returned  to  my  own  country  and 
my  work,  feeling  myself  a  part,  though  a  very  small  one,  of  the  great 
world  work  for  religion,  for  liberty,  and  for  peace.  I  have  asked 
myself,  with  much  earnestness,  What  is  wanted  to  keep  our  work 
up  to  the  high  level  on  which  it  stands?  I  am  convinced  that  we 
who  are  in  this  service  must  live  a  true,  full,  deep  life,  concerned 
in  all  the  religious,  ethical,  and  social  questions  that  move  society. 


55i 

I  know  by  experience  how  much  our  readers  appreciate  and  desire 
our  own  strong  convictions,  expressed  with  a  warm  sympathy  for 
their  struggles  and  failings.  What  we  wish  is  to  be  a  help  in  form- 
ing character.  This  means  that  our  aim  is  not,  and  never  should  be, 
to  make  Unitarians,  but  to  inspire  those  who  appeal  to  us  with  a 
living  faith  and  a  sound  conviction.  We  feel  the  greatness  of  our 
task  and  our  own  feebleness  to  meet  it.  But  we  cannot  help  doing 
what  we  can  in  simplicity  and  faith,  ever  striving  for  the  blessing 
which  comes  from  working  with  others  for  the  things  eternal. 
Conscious  of  the  greatness  and  holiness  of  our  task,  let  us  take  the 
shoes  from  off  our  feet,  knowing  that  we  stand  on  holy  ground. 
We  are  dealing  with  the  inner  life,  the  soul  of  man,  which  is  the 
holy  of  holies;  and,  because  of  this,  we  will  never,  never  submit  to 
sectarianism,  but,  as  God  gives  us  strength  and  wisdom,  we  will 
ever  stand  for  freedom  in  religion.     And  may  He  bless  us! 

Mrs.  R.  H.  Davis,  National  Corresponding  Secretary  of  the 
Women's  National  Alliance,  being  asked  to  outline  its  work  in  the 
Post-office  Mission,  explained  how  the  foundation  was  laid  by  Miss 
Sally  Ellis  in  Cincinnati.  She  was  then  a  parishioner  of  Rev.  C.  W. 
Wendte,  and  began  by  answering  letters  sent  to  him.  Mrs.  Davis 
also  paid  a  tribute  to  Mrs.  Brooke  Herford,  one  of  the  early  workers 
in  this  field.  Last  year  the  national  committee  received  a  report  of 
265,560  tracts  sent  out. 

Rev.  Miss  Gertrude  von  Petzold,  pastor  of  the  Free  Christian 
(Unitarian)  Church  of  Leicester,  England,  followed  with  an  able  and 
earnest  address  on  "The  Service  of  Woman  in  the  Early  Christian 
Church."  After  an  introduction  the  speaker  dwelt  first  upon  the 
enfranchisement  of  woman,  as  a  result  of  the  Christian  religion. 
A  comprehensive  summary  was  made  of  the  role  of  woman  in  the 
ancient  societies  of  Greece  and  Rome  and  Judea.  St.  Paul's  rab- 
binical views  were  discussed  at  some  length,  and  contrasted  with 
the  gentle  sympathy,  tender  reverence,  and  perfect  naturalness  and 
simplicity  of  his  Master,  Jesus  Christ.  The  women  of  the  New 
Testament  were  pictured,  especially  Mary,  "last  at  the  cross  and 
first  at  the  grave."  The  religious  functions  performed  by  the  women 
in  the  apostolic  and  post-apostolic  times  were  described,  with  the 
later  restrictions  upon  their  activity  which  were  thought  necessary. 


552 

The  stronger  the  Christian  priesthood  developed,  the  more  jealous 
they  were  of  the  influence  and  work  of  woman  in  the  Church.  The 
early  Church  put  women  on  the  same  spiritual  level  with  men,  but 
asceticism  and  priestcraft  reduced  them  to  a  quasi-bondage,  silenced 
their  prophecy,  and  decried  their  service.  Let  the  Church  of  the 
twentieth  century  return  to  them  their  right  to  prophesy  and  min- 
ister. The  speaker  concluded  with  an  earnest  plea  for  woman  in 
the  ministry. 

Lady  Bowring  from  England  was  then  introduced  by  Miss  Low, 
and  briefly  responded  with  a  message  of  warm  affection  from  our 
"English  cousins"  across  the  sea  and  a  word  of  appreciation  of  the 
remarkable  courtesies  extended  the  visiting  delegates. 

Lady  Bowring  was  followed  by  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond  of  New 
Zealand.  Miss  Richmond  expressed  her  astonishment  at  seeing  so 
many  Unitarian  women  together.  She  then  gave  a  description  of 
the  two  youthful  Unitarian  churches  in  Wellington  and  Auckland 
and  the  present  outlook.  "A  free  religion  fits  a  free  people."  "The 
world,"  said  Miss  Richmond,  "will  be  better  when  women  know 
what  they  want  and  ask  for  it  plainly."  The  meeting  was  closed 
by  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  the  audience  rising  in  her  honor.  Mrs. 
Howe  likened  the  conference  to  the  great  concourse  at  the  building 
of  the  Temple  of  Babel,  and  used  this  effective  figure  in  hoping 
that  the  great  tower  of  liberal  thought  now  building  by  the  differ- 
ent nations  would  be  one  of  strength  and  purpose. 

At  the  close  of  the  meeting,  tea  was  served. 

The  overflow  meeting  in  Channing  Hall  was  presided  over  by 
Miss  Caroline  S.  Atherton,  and  addressed  by  Miss  Von  Petzold, 
Miss  Van  Eck,  and  others. 


553 


DEPARTMENT  OF  NEW  AMERICANS. 
The  Problem  of  Foreign  Immigration. 

Held  in  Ford  Hall,  Tuesday  afternoon,  Sept.  24,  1907,  Rev. 
Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D.,  presiding. 

Dr.  Hale. — I  have  had  the  great  pleasure  and  the  great  honor 
of  being  asked  to  preside  at  this  meeting.  This  is  counted  by  me 
by  far  the  most  important  gathering  of  the  week.  It  is  the  one 
gathering  which  prophesies  that  we  can  do  something  and  that 
we  know  that  we  can  do  something,  and  that  we  are  not  satisfied 
by  good  talk  or  good  seed.  That  I  take  to  be  the  motto  of  free 
and  liberal  religion. 

I  had  hoped  that  the  ladies  and  gentlemen  from  abroad  who  have 
come  here  would  interest  themselves,  and  I  know  they  will  largely, 
in  the  conditions  of  their  own  countrymen  who  have  already  come 
here.  The  questions  that  they  will  want  to  ask  are  such  questions 
as  can  hardly  be  put  in  a  public  meeting.  I  have  therefore  requested 
my  friends  at  the  different  North  End  missions  to  prepare  a  little 
statement  of  a  few  points  of  interest  in  the  lives  of  new  Americans 
which  can  be  studied  within  twenty  miles  of  the  city  of  Boston.  I 
have  copies  of  this  little  leaflet  here.  They  are  not  for  circulation 
among  Americans  born,  who  know  all  about  these  things:  they 
are  for  circulation  among  Italians  and  Bohemians  and  Germans 
and  everybody  else  who  does  not  know  the  difference  between  Black- 
stone  Street  and  Park  Street. 

The  great  question  that  arises  before  us  here  is,  as  we  go  down 
to  the  pier  and  see  these  people  land,  Who  is  going  to  take  care  of 
them?  Well,  you  say,  the  Church  of  Christ  is  going  to  take  care 
of  them;  and  that  is  true.  I  am  not  going  to  say  anything  satirical. 
I  am  not  going  to  say  anything  bitter.  It  is  perfectly  true  that  the 
Christianity  of  this  land  takes  care  of  them.    We  have  established 


554 

here  the  Young  Travellers'  Aid  Society,  which  maintains  two  or 
three  missionaries  at  the  different  piers  for  the  purpose  of  meeting 
the  women  who  may  arrive  and  may  be  exposed  to  tempta- 
tions from  the  agents  of  evil  whom  they  encounter.  The  Young 
Women's  Christian  Association  has  a  messenger  doing  the  same 
work  in  the  same  way  for  the  women,  and  one  of  the  ladies  who 
represents  that  Association  is  present  here,  and  will  be  glad  after 
the  meeting  to  enter  into  conversation  with  anybody  who  cares  for 
that. 

I  will  say  that  our  friends  the  Presbyterians  and  our  friends  the 
Baptists  have  awakened  to  this  necessity,  and  they  are  working 
their  home  missionaries  as  well  as  they  can  in  the  different  lines. 
I  had  the  honor  to  be  mixed  up  myself  in  a  way  which  gratifies 
me  extremely  with  the  little  Waldensian  Church.  I  wrote  a  book 
once  which  brought  in  some  Waldensians,  and  they  have  done 
me  the  favor  to  translate  that  book  into  the  Italian  language, 
and  it  has  circulated  in  that  country.  I  am,  I  might  say,  a  sort 
of  bishop  to  the  Waldensians  in  America.  When  I  tell  you  that 
there  are  sixteen  churches  in  the  valleys  of  the  Alps  which  take 
the  name  of  Waldo,  the  founder  of  the  body  of  Waldenses,  that 
those  sixteen  churches  maintain  between  two  hundred  and  three 
hundred  missions  in  different  parts  of  the  world,  that  they  main- 
tain a  series  of  schools  in  Italy  so  good,  so  well  conducted,  that 
people  send  their  children  to  them  when  they  will  not  send  them 
to  the  government  schools,  I  give  some  idea,  which  I  wish  the 
American  churches  might  take  to  heart  and  imitate,  of  what  is  pos- 
sible for  a  church  which  is  wide-awake  and  in  earnest. 

Our  work,  as  I  have  said,  is  on  this  side,  and  I  cannot  but  hope 
that  before  we  adjourn  we  may  have  established  those  personal  re- 
lations between  people  here  who  are  interested  in  the  immigrants 
from  abroad  and  our  friends  on  the  other  side  of  the  water.  We 
will  tell  you  what  we  want  of  them,  and  they  shall  tell  us  what  they 
want  of  us.  You  can  hear  me  any  day,  but  you  cannot  hear  Mr. 
Jozan  any  day;  and  he  has  arrived  now,  and  I  am  going  to  ask  him 
to  speak  to  you  on  any  subject  that  he  likes,  so  it  has  a  connection 
with  the  welfare  of  these  people  who  come  to  us  from  abroad.  Mr. 
Jozan  is  kind  enough  to  speak  in  English. 


555 


REV.   N.   JOZAN,   OF  BUDAPEST. 

I  speak  on  a  subject  that  is  very  near  and  dear  to  our  hearts.  As 
far  as  we  are  Christians,  as  far  as  we  are  members  of  the  Christian 
family  of  men,  we  cannot  help  being  interested  in  the  goings  and 
doings  of  those  people  who  belong  to  our  own  community.  I  might 
just  tell  you,  in  the  way  of  statistics,  that  in  the  last  twenty  or  thirty 
years  there  have  come  into  America  about  two  millions  of  Hunga- 
rian emigrants.  I  suppose  that  most  of  them  have  been  actuated 
by  a  desire  to  better  their  own  condition,  to  get  a  means  of  living, 
to  get  better  pay  for  the  work  they  do  under  circumstances  that  are 
sometimes  unusual,  working  deep  down  in  the  mines,  working  in 
factories,  and  thereby  very  often  exposing  their  lives  to  imminent 
danger.  There  are  about  two  million  Hungarians  already  settled 
in  the  mining  districts  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Ohio  and  throughout 
the  whole  land.  There  may  be  some  farmers  among  them  as  well. 
And  I  feel  greatly  indebted  to  you,  and  especially  to  the  Unitarian 
Association,  for  this  opportunity.  I  shall  have,  after  this  confer- 
ence is  over,  a  special  commission  to  visit  some  of  these  colonies, 
and  to  get  them  into  touch  with  the  Association,  at  least  with  the 
local  minister,  and  find  a  way  of  bringing  them  into  my  own  com- 
munity,— that  is,  those  who  are  Unitarians  in  faith, — and  see  whether 
they  are  happy  in  their  settlement  in  America,  and  if  they  have 
come  to  stop  here  for  good.  And  the  best  advice  that  I  will  give 
them  will  certainly  be  that,  if  they  once  make  up  their  minds  to  look 
for  better  conditions  than  they  can  get  at  home  in  their  native  land, 
the  best  plan  to  adopt  for  them  would  be  to  stay  here  and  naturalize 
themselves  on  this  soil  which  is  the  embodiment  of  freedom,  of 
liberty,  of  truth,  and  that  native  power  in  man  that  is  upheld  by 
faith,  hope  and  love. 

I  might  admit  that  some  of  our  people  come  over  here  only — I 
would  not  say  merely — for  gain,  but  that  if  they  want  to  clear  off 
their  debts,  or  if  they  want  to  buy  a  few  acres  of  land  at  home,  they 
find  it  their  best  plan  to  come  over  to  America  and  earn  it.  Some  of 
them  do  that.  I  do  not  think  it  is  quite  to  the  purpose,  and  it  is 
far  from  the  principles  that  we  hold  and  cherish  in  our  hearts.  I 
might  tell  you  that  the  Unitarian  colonists  have  not  been  cared  for 
up  to  this  time,  because  there  are  not  many  of  them  and  they  are  so 


556 

fax  scattered.  There  are  about  six  hundred  souls  in  the  districts 
that  I  mentioned  before,  and  I  suppose  there  would  be  members  of 
their  families  joining  them,  so  there  would  be  about  one  thousand 
Unitarian  Hungarians  settled  in  the  United  States.  But  there  are 
hundreds  of  thousands  belonging  to  other  religious  bodies,  and  these 
are,  I  am  aware,  well  cared  for,  inasmuch  as  the  Calvinist  churches 
have  had  settled  congregations  and  pastors  to  administer  to  their 
needs  from  the  beginning.  These  Calvinist  churches  and  Lutheran 
churches  have  had  the  pleasure  of  enjoying  the  help  and  support 
of  the  Presbyterian  Board,  which  is  a  factor  in  this  country.  Latterly, 
I  am  told,  some  of  the  congregations  that  have  enjoyed  so  far 
the  help  and  support  of  the  Presbyterian  Board  have  formed 
themselves  as  a  separate  Hungarian  district  under  home  man- 
agement, and  I  know  that  there  is  a  great  contention  arising 
owing  to  this  fact.  But  for  my  own  part — I  cannot  say  that  I  have 
much  experience  on  this  subject,  because  I  am  just  beginning  to  find 
my  way  to  our  people — it  seems  to  me  that,  if  we  could  get  the 
American  Unitarian  Association,  and  the  sympathy  of  your  re- 
ligious liberals  directed  towards  these  new  Americans,  as  you  call 
them,  it  would  be  indeed  the  prayer  and  aspiration  of  my  heart,  and 
the  hearts  of  all  my  countrymen,  to  see  them  happy  and  well  situated 
in  this  land  of  liberty,  and  to  see  that  their  religious  needs  are  cared 
for,  and  that  their  social  standing  is  not  lowered,  but  lifted  up  to  the 
high  standards  after  which,  as  Americans,  you  aspire. 

Dr.  Hale. — The  public  by  and  large  knows  practically  nothing 
about  immigration.  Many  a  man  lives  day  after  day  without  know- 
ing how  much  the  population  of  the  country  is  enlarged.  The 
figures  of  the  statistics  show  that  in  the  year  1906  1,300,000  persons 
arrived  here  from  Europe.  They  show  at  the  same  time  that  400,000 
persons  of  European  birth  went  back  from  America  to  Europe. 
That  brings  up  a  very  curious  question,  why  they  came  and 
why  they  went  back;  and  that  is  one  of  the  questions  which  I  can- 
not help  hoping  we  may  be  helped  in  solving  by  the  presence  of 
friends  who  are  with  us  to-day.  I  am  going  to  ask  Mr.  Andr€,  of 
Florence,  one  of  our  Italian  friends,  to  address  us  on  this  subject. 

(Before  Mr.  Andre*  began  speaking,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  Howe  came 
upon  the  platform  and  was  received  with  applause.) 


557 

Dr.  Hale. — I  do  not  need  to  introduce  Mrs.  Howe  to  any  audience 
in  Boston,  or  to  any  audience  who  are  met  in  aid  of  any  people  who 
are  seeking  for  liberty.    [Applause.] 

REV.  L.  E.  TONY  ANDR£,  D.D.,  OF  FLORENCE,   ITALY. 

This  section  of  the  Liberal  Congress  puts  itself  the  question,  how 
to  render  aid  to  the  emigrants  of  European  origin  who  have  lately 
settled  in  the  United  States  of  America. 

The  majority  of  the  emigrants  whom  you  now  receive  in  your  coun- 
try are  of  Italian  origin,  and  principally  from  the  south  of  Italy. 

What  is  lacking  to  these  Italians  in  order  to  put  themselves  on  your 
level  ?  When  we  shall  have  answered  this  question,  it  will  be  easier 
to  render  aid  to  them. 

Their  greatest  need,  in  the  first  place,  is  sufficient  instruction. 
On  the  boat  which  I  took  to  come  to  New  York  were  numerous  emi- 
grants who  embarked  at  Naples,  and  I  saw  one  of  them  who  did  not 
know  how  to  sign  the  custom-house  declaration  which  your  authori- 
ties demand  of  passengers.  All  that  he  knew  how  to  do  was  to  make 
a  cross.     Many  others  were  doubtless  in  a  similar  condition. 

Not  that  the  Italians  of  the  south  are  ignorant  by  nature:  they  are, 
on  the  contrary,  susceptible  of  learning  quickly  and  well.  I  should 
compare  them  to  a  virgin  forest:  the  soil  is  fertile,  but  it  must  be 
enriched.  In  Italy,  especially  in  the  southern  districts,  the  schools 
and  teachers  are  wanting.  What  wonder  that  many  of  the  young 
men  can  neither  read  nor  write!  The  military  service  supplies  in 
part  this  want  of  instruction.  The  recruits  who  cannot  read  or 
write  receive  lessons;  but  the  women  and  the  young  men  of  less  than 
twenty-one  years  of  age  are  not  reached  by  this  system. 

The  first  thing  to  do,  then,  is  to  instruct  the  emigrants.  Their 
ignorance  exposes  them  to  be  the  victims  of  certain  of  their  compa- 
triots who  win  their  confidence  and  shamefully  abuse  it.  My  atten- 
tion has  been  called  among  others  to  an  abuse  which  has  for  emigrants 
bad  consequences.  Unscrupulous  compatriots  who  pose  as  small 
bankers  receive  the  savings  of  the  workingmen  and  either  use  them 
up  or  lose  them,  or  carry  them  off.  It  may  be  said,  in  passing,  that  it 
would  be  an  excellent  step  to  establish  Italian  savings-banks;  that  is 
to  say,  banks  in  which  the  Italian  language  is  spoken. 


558 

This  is  not  all.  Not  only  are  the  Italian  emigrants  who  come 
among  you  lacking  in  instruction,  but  they  have  need  of  completing 
their  education.  Accustomed  at  home  to  submit  themselves,  to  be 
guided  (for  Catholic  education  is  characterized  by  submission  and 
not  by  individual  initiative),  when  they  arrive  among  you,  where  all 
citizens  are  accustomed  to  control  and  guide  themselves  in  a  spirit  of 
practical  liberty  and  out  of  respect  for  the  law,  they  are  bewildered 
and  act  as  if  lost.  They  are  like  young  runaway  colts,  and  it  happens 
that,  on  the  one  hand,  they  abuse  the  liberty  which  they  find,  making 
bad  use  of  it,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  they  allow  themselves  to  be 
directed  by  unscrupulous  persons,  particularly  by  politicians.  The 
women,  above  all,  need  to  learn  to  use  the  privileges  accorded  to  their 
sex  in  America, — privileges  which  do  not  exist  in  Europe,  especially 
not  in  Italy,  where  the  woman  is  dependent  upon  the  man. 

This  work  of  education  cannot  be  done  in  a  day.  How  undertake 
it  ?  It  is  not  for  me  to  advise  you.  Better  than  I  you  know  what  can 
be  done  in  this  cause.  The  Italian  is  not  a  difficult  subject,  and  you 
will  find  in  him  a  thankful  one.  He  adapts  himself  readily  to  circum- 
stances and  to  the  new  surroundings  in  which  he  is  called  to  live. 
Then  he  has  good  qualities:  he  is  a  workman,  he  is  active,  he  is 
sober,  he  is  grateful.  He  does  not  resemble  certain  children  whom  I 
have  known,  who  are  overwhelmed  with  kindnesses  and  never  return 
thanks.  The  Italian  has  an  open  heart,  and,  if  one  does  him  a  kind- 
ness, he  knows  how  to  see  it  and  recognize  it.  Oh,  I  know,  he  is 
reproached  for  making  use  too  readily  of  the  knife.  It  is  a  relic  of 
ancient  custom.  Formerly  it  was  not  easy  to  obtain  justice  in  Italy, 
and  every  one  was  compelled  to  execute  it  for  himself.  But  little  by 
little  the  use  of  the  knife  is  tending  to  disappear,  and  the  emigrants 
who  come  among  you  will  free  themselves  from  it  still  more  quickly. 
It  is  sufficient  that  they  be  convinced  of  the  incorruptibility  and  fair- 
ness of  the  judges  and  of  the  support  of  good  laws. 

But  our  International  Congress  is  religious,  and  is  more  concerned 
with  the  religious  question.  The  liberals  who  are  concerned  for  the 
emigrant  wish  not  only  to  aid  them  materially,  but  also  spiritually, 
for  they  understand  that  there  cannot  be  true  happiness  for  man 
without  worship  and  without  religious  knowledge. 

On  this  side  the  task  is  great  and,  I  believe,  difficult.  The  Italian 
proletariat  is  ill-prepared  for  religious  liberalism.     For  a  long  time 


559 

it  has  been  under  the  domination  of  the  priest.  It  does  not  search 
for  religious  truth:  it  contents  itself  with  accepting  the  catechism 
which  has  been  taught  it,  and  which  often  it  does  not  understand. 
Its  religion  is  made  up  of  form,  and,  when  it  has  fulfilled  the  form 
prescribed  by  the  Church,  it  believes  itself  in  harmony  with  heaven. 
Permit  me,  in  this  connection,  to  tell  you  a  story. 

A  Calabrian  brigand,  having  learned  that  a  rich  traveller  would 
pass  by  a  solitary  road,  resolved  to  attack  and  rob  him;  but  as  in  this 
attack  he  feared  that  he  might  be  killed,  and  not  wishing  to  go  to 
hell  or  to  purgatory,  he  went  to  the  curd  of  a  neighboring  village,  placed 
a  knife  at  his  throat,  and  compelled  him  to  give  him  a  plenary  abso- 
lution for  his  past  sins,  as  well  as  those  which  he  might  yet  commit  in 
attacking  a  traveller.  Now  it  happened  that  the  police  captured  the 
brigand  at  the  moment  when  he  attempted  to  assassinate  the  traveller. 
Condemned  by  human  justice,  he  protested.  The  thing  appeared 
incomprehensible  to  him  from  the  moment  that  he  had  in  his  pocket 
an  anticipatory  absolution,  and  believed  that  he  was  in  harmony  with 
heaven ! 

I  repeat,  with  men  so  ill  prepared  the  task  is  not  easy,  and  all  the 
more  that  as  soon  as  they  have  disembarked  the  emigrants  are  drawn 
into  the  Catholic  churches  existing  in  the  United  States,  and,  con- 
sequently, kept  in  the  current  of  ideas  in  which  they  have  lived. 

A  good  thing  to  undertake  to  enlighten  these  men  would  be,  I 
think,  to  give  them  to  read  the  New  Testament.  There  exists  an 
excellent  Italian  translation  of  the  Gospels  and  of  the  Acts,  pub- 
lished in  Italy  by  the  Catholics  with  the  consent  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authority.  This  could  be  distributed  to  them.  If  they  have  not  a 
general  knowledge  of  the  gospel  history,  they  will  not  understand  the 
Liberal  tracts  which  it  will  next  be  necessary  to  distribute  to  them. 

If  the  Italians  are  ill  prepared  to  receive  Liberal  Protestantism, 
I  believe,  nevertheless,  that  it  is  this  phase  of  religious  thought  which 
they  will  understand  the  more  quickly  and  which  they  will  accept 
the  most  willingly.  Many  immigrants  are  anti-clerical,  detesting  the 
priest  and  rejecting  religion  because  a  militant  socialism  has  prompted 
them  to  fear  and  detest  authority.  The  Religious  Liberalism  which 
is  made  of  individual  respect  and  of  sincerity,  as  well  as  of  truth,  can- 
not but  present  to  them  religious  thought  in  a  friendly  aspect. 

I  have  noted  some  points  of  the  problem.    It  is  not  for  me  to  give 


560 

their  solutions.  Perhaps  you  have  already  undertaken  all  that  I 
have  suggested.  Your  good  works  are  so  numerous  that  I  have  been 
astonished  by  them.  Your  charity  has  known  how  to  penetrate 
everywhere  and  to  do  good  to  the  emigrants.  You  have  only  to  con- 
tinue in  the  way  which  you  have  already  begun. 

Dr.  Hale. — I  am  sure  that  you  have  gained  new  sympathy  for 
the  difficulties  of  these  poor  Italians  when  they  are  brought  before  a 
court  or  any  such  matter. 

I  will  say  something  now  as  to  the  extreme  difficulty  of  the  prob- 
lem in  hand.  Up  to  this  time  the  people  who  met  our  friends  at 
the  gates  have  been  rather  sporadic.  The  only  Christian  body, 
from  the  pope  of  Rome  down  to  the  Salvation  Army,  which  has  a 
permanent  mission  are  our  friends  of  the  Young  Women's  Chris- 
tian Association,  who  are  trying  to  take  care  of  girls,  and  the  Mor- 
mon Church.  The  Mormon  Church,  whenever  I  have  been  at  a 
landing,  had  its  man  there  in  a  long  linen  duster — you  know  him — 
to  receive  the  Mormons.  The  other  people  who  meet  them  are 
people  who  come  because  they — well,  they  have  an  axe  to  grind, 
and  the  person  who  arrives  may  be  sent  to  some  part  of  the  country 
for  which  he  or  she  is  the  least  suited.  A  Sicilian  orange  girl  may 
be  sent  to  cut  ice  in  Minnesota  and  a  Norwegian  with  a  ski  on  his 
back  may  be  sent  to  Florida  to  pick  oranges.  There  is  nothing  to 
prevent  that:  that  is  occurring  all  the  time.  Under  the  new  admin- 
istration which  has  been  determined  upon  at  Washington,  agents  are 
to  be  stationed  at  every  one  of  the  large  ports  who  are  in  communi- 
cation through  Mr.  Powderly's  office  with  the  governors  of  the  forty- 
five  States,  with  the  different  labor  bureaus  of  those  States,  and  with 
the  farmers  and  planters  and  other  such  people.  A  sufficient  force 
of  agents  is  to  be  at  each  landing-place  to  meet  the  man  at  the  very 
beginning,  and,  before  he  gets  switched  off,  send  him  to  some  place 
for  which  he  is  suited,  the  great  effort  being  that  the  immigrants 
shall  not  be  clustered  together  in  cities,  as  they  are  now  far  too  much, 
but  that  each  one  of  the  forty-five  States  may  have  the  advantage 
of  this  wave  of  human  life  which  comes  in  upon  us.  I  doubt  if  it 
is  generally  known  in  such  an  audience  as  this  how  few  drops  of 
the  wave  of  immigration  really  strike  west  of  the  Mississippi  River, 
and  the  effort  which  is  to  be  made  is  in  that  direction.     Persons  who 


56i 

are  sincerely  interested  in  the  subject  may  write  to  Washington  to 
the  Department  of  the  Interior  for  the  last  reports  of  Mr.  Sargent 
and  our  friend  Mr.  Billings. 

Mr.  Holden  is  so  kind  as  to  say  that  he  will  himself  describe  the 
position  of  the  thousand  Italians  in  whom  he  is  personally  inter- 
ested in  the  town  of  Milford  in  New  Hampshire,  and  I  have  asked 
him  to  take  a  few  minutes  for  that  purpose. 


REV.  FRANCIS   WILDER  HOLDEN. 

I  find  myself  here  to  tell  something  of  what  I  know,  and  perhaps 
more  that  I  know  just  a  little  about.  The  town  of  Milford,  N.H., 
has  somewhere  in  the  vicinity  of  one  thousand  Italians.  Most  Of 
these  might  be  called  Italians  from  Northern  Italy.  There  are  a  few 
from  Southern  Italy,  and  they  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  each 
other.  The  northern  Italian  calls  the  southern  Italian  a  dago,  does 
not  speak  of  him  in  any  better  terms  than  some  of  us  have  been 
accustomed  to  speak  of  those  who  are  willing  to  come  and  dig  our 
ditches  and  lay  pipes  for  our  sewers  and  our  water.  Nevertheless,  we 
have  those  two  classes.  The  northern  Italian  is  one  that  has  struck  for 
liberty.  The  southern  Italian  does  not  care  so  much  for  liberty:  he 
does  not  care  so  much  to  educate  his  children.  I  have  not  come  in 
contact  very  much  with  the  southern  Italians,  but  I  have  come  in  con- 
tact with  some  of  the  northern  Italians.  I  want  to  tell  you  my  intro- 
duction to  those  people,  which  was  somewhat  picturesque.  One  of  my 
American  people  died.  He  was  a  stone-cutter.  We  have  many  stone- 
cutters in  Milford.  The  stone-cutters'  union  is  very  strong.  This 
American  citizen  had  no  goodplace  from  which  a  burial  service  could  be 
conducted,  and  the  undertaker  came  to  me,  and  asked  if  I  would 
conduct  the  service  and  where  it  could  be  held.  I  said,  "I  will 
conduct  the  service,  and  you  may  have  it  in  the  Unitarian  church." 
The  hour  was  set  for  Sunday  afternoon.  I  walked  down  toward  the 
church,  and  I  heard  music.  Soon  I  saw  a  large  body  of  men,  two 
hundred  and  fifty  or  more,  marching  along  the  street,  led  by  the  best 
band  in  New  Hampshire,  the  Italian  band  of  Milford.  They  led 
that  body  of  people  to  the  church,  where  they  took  their  seats,  and 
I  conducted  the  burial  services  and  laid  away  one  of  their  fellow 
stone-cutters.     From  that  day  to  this,  whenever  I  meet  those  people 


562 

or  wherever  I  meet  them,  though  I  cannot  talk  with  the  Italians, 
they  always  lift  their  hats  and  bow, — a  peculiar  recognition. 

Now,  if  Dr.  Hale  should  come  there  to  speak  and  it  should  be 
announced  that  he  would  conduct  a  religious  service  in  the  Uni- 
tarian church  or  in  any  church,  I  do  not  believe  one  of  those  Italians 
would  be  there.  I  will  tell  you  why.  Their  thought  of  the  Church 
is  of  some  institution  that  takes  away  their  freedom.  The  north- 
ern Italian  has  struck  for  freedom,  and  nothing  else  will  satisfy  him. 

Let  me  give  you  a  little  experience  of  the  Baptist  minister,  who 
thought  he  would  do  something  for  those  people.  He  appointed  a 
religious  service  in  the  school-house  in  the  section  of  the  town  where 
they  live.  They  would  not  come  into  that  building  because  it  was 
a  religious  service.  They  gathered  around  the  outside  of  the  build- 
ing, but  from  a  religious  standpoint  he  could  do  nothing  whatever 
with  them,  simply  because  they  had  no  use  for  religion  if  it  was  to 
destroy  their  freedom. 

Now  let  me  tell  you  of  another  instance,  an  experience  of  this  same 
minister.  There  was  a  death  in  one  of  these  families.  They  had 
absolutely  rejected  the  Catholic  Church.  They  are  Catholics.  The 
women  do  not  know  what  to  do  unless  they  can  have  some  form  of 
Catholicism  or  of  the  church  where  they  can  see  it.  They  called 
upon  the  Baptist  minister  to  bury  one  of  their  children.  And,  as  he 
told  me  that  experience,  conducting  a  Protestant  service  under 
Catholic  conditions,  as  he  entered  the  room  where  the  child  lay,  he 
found  that  candles  were  burning  at  the  head  and  the  foot  of  the 
casket.  They  knew  nothing  but  their  own  form  of  religion.  But 
their  husbands,  the  men  who  had  struck  for  liberty,  would  not  per- 
mit or  would  not  ask  the  priest  to  come  to  them.  The  Episcopal 
clergyman  is  called  upon  more  often  than  any  other  to  conduct  these 
services,  probably  because  the  form  is  more  nearly  what  they  have 
been  accustomed  to. 

I  believe  to-day  that,  if  we  had  a  Unitarian  minister  who  could 
come  to  Milford  and  speak  to  them  in  the  Italian  language,  telling 
them  of  our  faith,  that  an  Italian  church  could  be  established  there. 
We  cannot  bring  them  into  one  of  our  churches.  They  will  not  prob- 
ably affiliate  with  us  in  that  way:  they  do  not  want  to.  They  would 
rather  be  by  themselves,  they  would  rather  have  their  own  part  of 
the  town;  but  they  are  good  citizens.     Those  Italians  from  North- 


563 

ern  Italy  are  becoming  American  citizens  just  as  soon  as  it  is  pos- 
sible for  them.  Their  children  are  in  the  public  schools:  they  are 
in  the  high  school.  Recently  I  attended  one  of  the  school  exer- 
cises in  which  an  Italian  took  part  in  speaking,  and  his  selection  was 
a  surprise  to  me,  for  he  brought  in  the  thought  that  Christ  was  the 
son  of  Joseph.    So  that  idea  appealed  to  them  in  some  way. 

You  want  to  know  if  those  Italians  are  capable  of  taking  care  of 
themselves.  Mr.  Chairman,  they  are  perfectly  able.  The  Italians 
in  that  town  are  business  men.  And,  when  I  say  "business  men," 
I  mean  that  they  are  able  to  set  another  fellow  to  work  at  a  profit. 
That  is  what  many  of  us  cannot  do.  The  Italians  there  are  owners 
of  quarries;  they  are  owners  of  stone  sheds.  They  do  something 
else  besides  selling  peanuts:  they  are  owners  of  business  plants, 
and  are  doing  good  work.  They  want  their  children  educated. 
And,  when  they  know  of  a  religion  that  will  give  them  larger  liberty, 
they  will  be  reckoned  among  those  who  are  religious,  who  have 
faith  in  God  and  man.  That  is  what  I  say  of  the  Italians  in  the 
town  where  I  am.  Give  us  a  Unitarian  who  can  teach  them,  speak 
to  them  in  the  Italian  language,  and  they  will  listen. 

Dr.  Hale. — We  are  so  fortunate  that  I  am  able  to  introduce  to 
you  one  of  the  most  distinguished  representatives  of  the  scholars 
of  the  city  of  Prague,  Professor  Masaryk  from  that  city.  We  have 
asked  him  to  speak  to  us  of  the  Slavonian-Bohemian  representations 
in  America,  the  number  of  whose  representatives  is  much  larger 
than  this  audience  supposes. 

PROFESSOR  T.  G.  MASARYK,  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PRAGUE. 

I  am  to  speak  of  the  Slavonians,  of  whom  there  are  about 
4,000,000  living  in  your  country.  I  am  to  speak  more  especially  of 
the  Bohemians.  I  have  no  right  to  speak  in  their  name.  I  will 
communicate  some  observations  I  made  in  this  country  recently, 
and  twice  before  when  I  was  here.  I  would  not  dare  to  discuss 
the  whole  problem  of  immigration.  I  will  give  you  just  a  few  of 
my  own  observations. 

I  remember  that,  when  I  first  came  to  America,  on  the  boat  I  saw 
a  little  girl.    She  had  her  address  checked  on  her  breast.    She 


564 

could  not  speak  with  anybody, — not  English,  of  course.  I  had  the 
impression  of  a  living  box  or  trunk  being  checked  and  sent  to  America. 
That  is  the  first  impression  I  had  of  the  immigration  problem. 
And  afterwards,  when  I  came  here,  for  instance,  to  Pittsburg  or 
Allegheny,  and  observed  the  life  of  the  miners,  I  saw  again  living 
trunks  and  boxes  which  are  used  for  the  industry  of  your  great 
country.  A  man  cannot  speak  with  his  fellow-citizens;  he  cannot 
speak  with  his  own  children.  It  is  touching  to  see  how  among  our 
Slavonians  and  Bohemians  very  often  the  family  is  broken  up  simply 
because  nobody  is  left  to  take  care  of  the  children.  The  father  and 
mother  are  in  the  mines:  the  children  live  on  the  street,  pick  up 
the  English  language,  forget  their  own.  The  father  and  mother 
cannot  speak  English,  and  so  they  cannot  converse,  father  and  child. 
I  saw  this  very  often,  not  only  in  Pittsburg,  but  in  New  York,  Chicago, 
everywhere.  And  so  I  see  that  the  problem  is,  of  course,  that  the 
people  coming  here  should  as  soon  as  possible  learn  English.  But 
that  is  not  enough,  to  know  English,  even  if  they  speak  it  very  well. 
It  is  not  a  question  of  language  only,  but  of  citizenship  communion, 
of  spiritual  communion.  For  these  people  learn  English  as  they 
can, — they  learn  it  in  the  public  schools,  they  pick  it  up  on  the  streets, 
and  so  on;  but  they  are  not  citizens,  they  are  not  Americans,  and  they 
cannot  be,  because  they  are  out  of  spiritual  and  civic  communion 
with  you.  They  do  not  communicate,  and  they  cannot.  I  often 
am  told  by  Americans,  "There  is  a  kind  of  clan  instinct  among 
these  Slavonians:  they  gather  where  they  will  not  be  assimilated 
with  us."  Of  course,  if  you  would  say  assimilation  only  by  lan- 
guage, that  is  not  difficult.  What  I  mean  is  the  assimilation  of  cult- 
ure and  of  spiritual  life,  and  that  is  wanting.  I  often  hear  from 
clergymen  and  men  who  care  for  religion,  "Your  Bohemians  are 
free  thinkers;  they  are  hostile  to  religion;  they  are  atheists."  It 
is  true  that  very  many  of  them  are  free  thinkers,  and  perhaps 
atheists, — I  cannot  tell, — but  I  know  these  free  thinkers  and  atheists 
long  for  spiritual  life.  They  have  nobody  to  give  it  to  them  except- 
ing the  Roman  Church.  Catholicism  is  spreading,  of  course,  here 
in  the  United  States ;  and  it  soon  will  be,  and  I  suppose  it  is  already, 
a  great  problem  of  this  country.  The  Roman  Church  meets  these 
people.  A  Bohemian  and  a  Slavonian  will  be  more  carefully  cared 
for  than  he  is  in  his  own  country.     But  there  is  a  minority  of  the 


565 

people,  perhaps  half  of  them,  who  dislike  every  sort  of  ecclesiastical 
and  religious  life,  simply  because  in  Austria,  where  they  come  from, 
they  know  only  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  the  Church  of  the  State, 
and  they  hate  the  State  Church.  If  you  would  meet  them  on  their 
own  ground  and  of  course  in  their  own  language,  you  will  see  that 
these  "atheists"  will  be  very  good — I  won't  say  Christians,  but  re- 
ligious men;  and  I  am  sure, if  Jesus  were  to  come  again,  he  would 
go  to  these  atheists,  to  these  people  who  do  not  care  anything  for 
religion  because  they  are  cast  out  of  spiritual  communion,  and  be- 
cause they  have  no  opportunity  of  hearing  and  seeing  what  true 
religion  is. 

And  so  I  wish  that  they  could  meet  you,  and  that  you  would  meet 
them.  I  think  they  are  ripe  for  this  meeting.  I  came  here  Sunday, 
and  was  engaged  for  the  meetings  here,  but  was  invited  by  my  coun- 
trymen to  speak.  Before  I  came,  they  wrote  me  to  speak  on  the 
political  and  social  situation  of  Bohemia  and  of  Austria.  When  I 
came  to  speak  to  them,  I  saw  that  they  would  like  better  to  hear 
something  of — as  they  styled  it — philosophy  and  religion.  And 
these  simple  workingmen  and  atheists  desired  that  I  would  speak 
on  the  aim  of  life  and  on  the  problems  of  religion  and  philosophy. 
They  could  not  express  clearly  what  they  wanted,  but  I  saw  it  was 
their  hunger  and  thirst  for  spiritual  life.  That  is  my  impression,  and, 
as  I  would  say  once  more,  I  only  wish  the  Unitarians  could  and 
would  meet  these  my  poor,  unfortunate  people. 

Dr.  Hale. — It  is  not  the  first  time  in  history  that  Christendom  has 
needed  a  voice  from  Bohemia  to  awake  it  from  the  dead,  and  I  dare 
say  we  may  get  such  a  summons  again  and  again  and  again. 

As  we  have  been  speaking  of  Slavonians,  let  me  tell  a  single  point 
which  happened  here  a  few  years  ago,  when  we  had  our  first  impor- 
tation of  Russian  Jews,  the  first  time  any  had  landed  in  Boston. 
From  the  Hebrew  Charitable  Society  we  got  hints  of  the  first  value 
as  to  the  care  of  these  poor  people  who  had  been  kicked  out  of  Russia. 
I  think  there  arrived  40,000  Russian  Jews  in  Boston,  where  we  were  not 
used  to  them,  did  not  understand  them,  and  the  very  skilful  arrange- 
ments of  the  Hebrew  societies  took  care  of  them.  A  year  later, 
in  speaking  at  a  large  public  meeting, — I  asked  the  gentlemen  of  the 
press  to  make  note  of  what  I  said, — I  said  that  I  did  not  believe  that 


566 

in  that  one  year  one  of  those  Russian  Jews  had  been  known  in  any 
poorhouse  or  house  of  correction  or  other  place  of  detention  in 
Massachusetts,  and  that  I  would  be  obliged  to  any  person  who  would 
give  me  the  name  of  any  such  individual.  Again  and  again  I  re- 
peated that  challenge  in  public,  and  we  did  not  hear  of  a  single  per- 
son from  that  immigration  who  in  a  year's  time  had  been  any  weight 
on  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  or  on  the  town.  I  repeat 
that  challenge  now,  and  will  say  that  we  have  been  very  largely  in- 
debted to  our  friends  from  Russia  for  the  persons  whom  they  have 
sent  here.  The  children,  as  our  children  know,  are  taking  then- 
places  in  the  public  schools  with  those  who  study  hardest  and 
achieve  the  most,  and  I  do  not  want  any  person  to  think  we  are 
neglecting  these  problems.  I  have  the  pleasure  of  introducing  to 
you  now  one  who  comes  to  us  from  Minnesota,  and  is  the  presi- 
dent of  the  Norwegian  Unitarian  Association,  Rev.  Mr.  Norman. 

REV.    AMADEUS    HALVDON    NORMAN,    OF    HANSKA,    MINN. 

You  are  trying  an  experiment,  friends,  which  has  never  been  tried 
since  history  began.  Instead  of  keeping  this  beautiful  continent, 
this  almost  paradise-like  district,  to  yourselves  and  shutting  your 
gates  to  suffering  humanity  outside,  you  have  most  magnanimously 
opened  the  gates  and  permitted  the  oppressed  poor  from  all  lands, 
belonging  to  all  peoples,  to  come  to  your  shores  and  make  their 
homes  among  you.  A  million  of  such  are  landing  on  your  shores 
every  year  and  being  distributed  through  the  various  parts  of  this 
great  land.  It  is  the  most  wonderful  experiment  that  has  ever  been 
undertaken.  And  you  need  all  the  acquired  culture,  all  the  acquired 
understanding  of  human  nature,  in  order  to  solve  the  great  and 
mighty  problems  that  this  opening  of  the  gates  will  involve.  The 
founders  of  this  country  were  deep  thinkers.  They  laid  the 
foundations  deep  and  strong  for  the  mightiest  people,  I  believe,  that 
this  world  has  ever  seen.  It  has  been  fashionable  in  certain  quarters 
during  these  last  few  years  to  belittle  the  work  of  these  men,  to  be- 
little the  maxims  laid  down  in  the  immortal  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. But,  in  spite  of  all  that  may  be  said  to  the  contrary,  I 
believe  that  the  substance  of  these  maxims  is  everlastingly  true,  and 
that  you  and  I,  that  all  men  are  created  to  be  free  and  independent  sons 


567 

and  daughters  of  the  living  God;  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  strong  to 
help  the  weak;  that  ultimately  the  salvation,  the  continuance  of  the 
strong  himself,  depends  on  his  willingness  to  help  his  weaker  and 
more  unfortunate  brothers.  No  work  can  be  greater  than  this.  No 
work  is  nobler,  no  work  can  be  more  important.  And  no  people  on 
this  earth  has  yet  entered  into  such  ventures  with  the  whole-hearted- 
ness  that  you  friends  of  New  England  have  done. 

Our  mission  as  Liberal  Christians,  I  take  it,  is  a  twofold  one.  We 
are,  in  the  first  place,  to  try  and  do  what  we  can  to  help  to  develop 
a  better  class  of  men  and  women,  who  will  live  better,  purer,  and 
nobler  lives.  We  are,  in  the  second  place,  to  try  to  help  to  perfect 
the  principles  of  true  liberty  by  helping  to  develop  a  better  class  of 
citizenship.  A  few  of  us  "  New  Americans"  in  the  West  have  begun 
to  think  that,  as  we  have  left  our  political  parties  behind  us  on 
the  other  side  of  the  ocean  and  are  trying  to  find  our  ways  into 
the  political  parties  of  our  adopted  Fatherland,  so  we  will  try 
to  find  our  places  as  well  as  we  can  in  the  religious  and  moral 
forces  of  this  country.  We  will  try  to  merge  as  fast  and  as  speedily 
as  we  can  in  all  the  forces  that  are  working  for  the  advancement 
of  the  highest  and  best  life  in  this  our  adopted  Fatherland. 
This  work  is  greatly  needed.  In  my  State,  Minnesota,  for  instance, 
we  have  2,000  Lutheran  churches.  We  are  not  without  churches, 
but  these  churches  are  but  a  little  removed  from  the  old  Catholicism. 
It  would  seem  ill  in  me  to  stand  here  before  you  and  talk  to  you 
about  people  who  are  not  here  to  hear  me,  and  consequently  who 
are  not  in  a  position  to  answer  me.  But  I  will  just  illustrate  the 
need  of  a  sound  view  of  life  and  of  religion  among  our  people  by  an 
illustration,  and  will  let  that  speak  for  itself. 

A  year  ago  one  of  the  greatest  Lutheran  denominations  held  its 
annual  meeting  in  Duluth,  Minn.  A  resolution  was  proposed  to 
the  convention,  a  convention  of  something  like  2,000  representa- 
tives, deploring  the  loss  to  the  denomination  of  two  ministers 
during  the  past  year,  without  stating  the  cause.  Some  independent 
minister  in  the  audience  inquired.  He  wanted  to  have  them  set 
forth  in  that  resolution  the  reasons  why  the  denominations  deplored 
the  loss  of  these  two  men,  but  that  was  squelched.  Now  what  were 
the  facts  in  this  case?  The  facts  were  these:  that  one  of  these  men, 
a  very  fine  man,  had  graduated  from  their  school,  from  their  college 


568 

in  the  West,  and  after  that  he  had  sojourned  in  New  England,  had 
spent  a  year,  I  think,  at  Yale  College,  and  had  been  somewhat 
tainted  by  the  peculiar  views  that  prevail  at  Yale, — not  very  serious, 
we  would  think,  but  for  them  it  was  very  important  indeed.  This 
man  was  dismissed  in  disgrace  from  the  denomination.  The  other 
man,  also  a  minister,  had  left  his  family,  his  poor  wife  with  several 
children,  and  gone  where  no  people  knew  where  he  was,  and  had 
done  other  things  that  it  would  be  a  disgrace  to  mention  in  an  audi- 
ence like  this.  But  these  two  men  were  placed  in  the  same  position 
from  this  ecclesiastical  point  of  view. 

Friends,  there  are  many  here  to  speak  to  you,  and  I  know  that  my 
time  will  soon  be  up.  But  I  want  to  say  to  you  that  you  have  under- 
taken a  great  work  amongst  the  New  Americans  of  the  West,  a  very 
important  work,  both  religiously  and  socially.  It  may  have  the 
greatest  influence  in  moulding  the  future  of  that  great  and  steadily 
growing  region  of  our  country.  Of  course,  the  results  so  far  may 
seem  to  you  very  meagre,  and  they  are  meagre, — no  one  knows  that 
better  than  myself;  and  I  would  wish  very  much  to  be  able  to  be 
here  to  give  you  a  much  better  report  of  my  little  stewardship. 
But  you  must  remember,  friends,  that  great  thoughts  are  slow  in 
fruition.  It  takes  time  for  them  to  be  rooted  deeply.  It  is  no  easy 
task  to  win  a  considerable  number  of  men  and  women  from  the 
old  views  and  the  old  life  to  the  new  view  and  the  new  life  that 
is  dawning  on  us.  And  one  of  the  greatest  difficulties  that  we  have 
to  face  is  to  find  the  right  men  to  lead  in  this  movement.  The  situa- 
tion is  very  complicated  and  very  difficult.  I  do  not  believe  that 
any  set  of  men  since  the  early  stages  of  the  Reformation  has  ever 
had  to  face  such  problems  as  the  modern  man,  and  especially  the 
modern  minister,  has  to  face.  It  is  comparatively  easy  for  a  man  to 
get  his  head  out  from  the  old  dogmas,  to  be  liberated  from  the  old 
creeds,  the  old  intellectual  hindrances;  but  it  is  quite  a  different 
matter  to  become  so  thoroughly  grounded  in  the  ideals  of  the  new 
life  and  the  new  thought  as  to  be  able  to  stand  for  it,  and  to  speak 
to  his  men  with  power  in  life  as  well  as  in  word.  Here  is  our  great- 
est difficulty.  But  with  your  great  magnanimity,  your  great  gene- 
rosity in  sustaining  us  and  advising  us  in  every  possible  way,  I 
assure  you  that  we  will  go  forward  step  by  step  as  earnestly,  as  sin- 
cerely, as  we  can,  and  give  what  we  are,  what  we  have,  to  advance 


569 

our  beautiful,  our  deep,  our  broad  common  religion  among  our 
new  countrymen  in  the  Western  States.    I  thank  you. 

Dr.  Hale. — Since  I  came  into  the  hall,  I  have  been  informed 
that  we  have  here  a  gentleman  who,  I  hope,  will  say  a  word  to  us 
upon  the  distribution  of  the  great  immigration.  The  great  problem 
at  this  moment  is  that  the  stream  of  immigration  may  not  be  confined 
into  five  cities,  but  that  it  be  scattered  among  the  forty-five  States. 
This  gentleman  I  shall  ask  to  speak.  I  do  not  know  that  he  will, 
but  I  hope  he  will.  After  his  address  Mrs.  Howe  is  so  kind  as  to  say 
that  she  will  say  something  on  the  subject  to  which  she  has  given  her 
life.  [Applause.]  Is  Senator  Hinds,  of  Mississippi,  still  present? 
If  so,  I  will  ask  him  to  come  to  the  platform  and  say  something  to 
us  about  the  necessities  of  the  South  and  West  in  receiving  their 
share  of  the  great  immigration.  Senator  Hinds  represents  Hinds 
County  in  the  Senate  of  Mississippi. 

SENATOR  HINDS,  OF  MISSISSIPPI. 

Mr.  Chairman, — None  of  us  can  claim  true  Americanship  unless 
we  have  Indian  blood,  and,  your  humble  servant's  father  being  a 
Moor  and  his  mother  part  Indian,  therefore  I  can  claim  upon  this 
platform  American  blood.  And  under  those  auspices  I  am  glad  to 
have  the  chance  to  talk  to  this  Liberal  Congress.  I  was  travelling 
in  Japan  when  this  movement  held  its  first  meeting  in  England.  I 
am  satisfied  that  under  Unitarian  auspices  it  will  be  a  success,  be- 
cause I  am  glad  to  say  upon  this  platform  that  not  one  of  the  Unita- 
rian churches  has  followed  the  despoilers  who  drew  the  color  line 
in  religious  bodies.  And  whenever  they  do,  whenever  any 
religious  party  or  any  State  or  government,  will  draw  a  line  against 
its  constituents,  it  is  not  worthy  of  the  respect  of  the  American 
people.  I  know  that  this  movement  is  going  to  be  a  success,  and  I 
hope  that  it  will  take  great  hold  in  the  Southland,  because  you  may 
remember  you  have  an  American  constituency  in  the  Southland 
who  in  the  next  census  will  number  nearly  15,000,000,  whom  you 
do  not  know  of.  You  must  not  forget  that  these  American-bred 
brown  and  yellow  men  were  born  among  you  of  American  ancestry 
for  two  hundred  years  back,  and  are  to-day  the  best  friend  the  white 


57o 

man  has.  They  guarded  your  sisters  in  the  Southland  when  the 
men  of  the  South  were  fighting  to  enslave  them,  and  were  always 
true.  Do  not  follow  the  newspaper  reports  and  magazine  writers, 
and  think  that  the  negroes  are  all  bad.  You  do  not  find  an  educated 
black  man  or  a  brown  man,  or  a  colored  man  with  good  education 
and  good  training,  in  any  American  house  of  correction.  We 
want  to  get  those  people  with  us.  They  are  part  of  you,  and  will 
be  among  you,  and  will  help  you  in  both  war  and  peace,  unless 
you  disorganize  them  by  your  treatment.  I  am  thankful  to  be 
among  you,  and  I  hope  that  at  the  next  liberal  meeting  you  hold 
you  will  have  a  delegation  and  a  representation  of  the  black, 
brown,  and  yellow  people  from  all  parts  of  the  country. 

Dr.  Hale. — Now,  as  I  said,  I  need  never  introduce  Mrs.  Howe 
to  any  audience  in  the  civilized  world. 


MRS.  JULIA  WARD  HOWE. 

I  am  just  up  from  a  residence  of  many  weeks  in  the  country,  and 
came  with  some  inconvenience  and  fatigue,  but  the  attraction  of 
this  great  meeting  made  it  impossible  for  me  to  stay  away,  and  I 
am  very  glad  that  I  came  here,  for  I  feel  so  at  home  in  it.  I  feel  that 
it  has  the  real  atmosphere  of  a  human  family,  and  therefore  we  are 
all  at  home. 

I  have  long  wished  that  we  might  find  a  religious  basis  which 
should  greatly  extend  the  sympathy  of  the  different  Christian  denom- 
inations. I  must  have  a  word  about  that,  because  it  is  a  subject  so 
near  my  heart.  I  do  not  suppose  that  we  shall  attain  it  in  this  con- 
vention or  perhaps  in  some  others,  but  it  is  a  great  object, — it  is  a 
great  object.  Just  as  all  people  are  agreed  that  honesty  is  important 
and  so  many  other  things  upon  which  there  is  no  question,  so  I  wish 
that  it  may  be  that  there  shall  be  no  question  among  civilized  peoples 
whether  they  are  religious  or  not,  because  religion  is  a  prime  neces- 
sity of  the  human  character. 

I  want  to  say  a  little  word  about  the  special  subject  of  this  meet- 
ing this  afternoon.  Quite  a  number  of  years  ago  I  was  one  of  a 
number  of  ladies  who  went  all  over  the  country  every  year,  holding 


57i 

a  congress  of  women,  at  which  we  tried  to  present  and  discuss  mat- 
ters that  seemed  very  important  for  human  society  everywhere. 
At  one  of  these  I  tried  very  hard  to  have  a  thorough  representation 
of  the  alien  races  in  America.  I  found  it  very  difficult  to  get  any 
available  knowledge  about  the  subject.  I  wanted  to  find  out  how 
the  Germans  were  living,  how  far  they  became  a  part  of  American 
society,  how  far  they  resisted  and  held  back.  I  wanted  to  know 
the  same  thing  about  the  Poles  and  Hungarians  and  about  the 
Italians.  Well,  here  in  Boston  we  know  a  good  deal  about  the  Ital- 
ians, because  there  have  been  various  associations  devised  especially 
to  aid  the  immigrants,  and  I  was  once  an  officer  in  one  of  these,  but 
we  were  Protestants,  and  it  seemed  better  to  many  to  allow  the 
Catholic  Church  to  take  care  of  these  people.  I  was  not  consulted 
in  this.  I  should  not  have  been  of  this  opinion,  but  the  care  of  the 
immigrants  passed  into  their  hands.  But  I  am  very  much  inter- 
ested and  enlightened  by  what  has  been  said  here  about  the  apti- 
tude of  these  foreign  races  for  a  rational  system  of  religion.  Of 
course,  our  Catholic  friends,  who  have  many  excellent  points,  too 
much  insist  that  what  is  not  Catholic  is  irreligious.  I  hope  that  a 
great  many  of  them  have  learned  quite  the  contrary  from  living 
among  us,  but  that  is  a  great  difficulty  in  reaching  the  Latin  popu- 
lations. They  are  so  possessed  with  this  idea  that,  when  they  give 
up  the  Catholic  Church,  they  think  that  they  give  up  religion  alto- 
gether. Now,  if  there  is  any  religion  that  ought  to  help  those  people, 
it  is  the  Unitarian  religion.  We  are  bound  to  do  it.  I  am  much  in- 
terested to  hear  of  Unitarian  literature  being  published  in  Italian.  I 
remember  quite  awhile  ago  I  was  much  surprised  to  find  that  to  South 
America  the  Methodists  send  a  great  many  zealous  missionaries, 
who  are  taught  to  speak  Spanish  fluently.  I  think  that  we  Unitarians 
also  must  go  in  for  a  gift  of  tongues:  we  must  learn  these  different 
languages,  and  we  must  see  that  this  good  literature,  this  uplifting, 
convincing  literature  which  recognizes  the  human  values  in  all  races, 
diverse,  but  sacred  and  deep  and  solid, — it  is  our  business,  I  think, 
that  this  should  be  widely  given  and  used.  And  particularly,  seeing 
so  many  women  here,  —  I  am  sure  at  least  a  score  of  women's 
clubs  are  represented  here,  I  should  advise  them, — I  used  to  call 
myself  once  a  mother  of  clubs,  but  my  family  now  is  quite  beyond 
my  control, — I  should  recommend  the  study  of  this  subject.     It  is 


572 

a  very  pressing  need  and  deeply  interesting,  and  I  think  the  women's 
clubs  could  take  it  up  to  great  advantage.    [Applause.] 

Dr.  Hale. — I  have  been  so  fortunate  as  to  secure  to  speak  to  us 
this  evening  Mr.  Bloomfield,  who  is,  I  had  almost  said,  the  pope 
of  the  North  End, — I  don't  know  how  he  will  like  that.  He  will 
address  you  on  the  condition  of  affairs  there. 

MR.   MEYER  BLOOMFIELD,   CIVIC  SERVICE  HOUSE,  BOSTON. 

In  the  name  of  my  people,  I  must  express  a  tribute  of  respect  to 
Professor  Masaryk,  because  to  many  of  us  who  have  followed  Rus- 
sian affairs  closely  his  name  stands  out  as  one  of  the  great  moral 
leaders  in  that  part  of  Europe  at  the  present  time.  I  should  like  in 
two  minutes  to  dwell  on  two  or  three  points  very  appropriate  to  a 
conference  of  this  sort,  which  are  the  result  of  eighteen  years  of  life 
on  the  East  Side  of  New  York  and  seven  years  in  the  North  End  of 
Boston.  If  this  company  here  were  the  legislative  body  that  Dr.  Hale 
prays  over  during  the  winter  in  Washington,  I  think  our  first  bill 
would  be  that  no  immigrant  with  children  to  bring  up  should  be 
allowed  to  live  in  a  city  of  over  10,000  population  during  at  least 
the  waiting  period  of  naturalization.  The  most  serious  problem  of 
a  foreign  quarter  is  the  most  serious  problem  of  the  whole  city.  The 
people  come  into  an  atmosphere  of  irreverence.  The  big  city  spells 
irreverence,  and  this  is  destructive  of  most  of  the  traditions  that 
the  people  of  all  nationalities  bring  with  them, — traditions  which  no 
customs  inspection  or  official  inspection  could  possibly  detect,  yet 
the  greatest  moral  wealth  of  the  immigrant  who  comes  to  our  shores. 
Now,  therefore,  all  our  efforts  must  be  made  in  a  sense  as  substi- 
tutes, as  counter-irritants  to  this  irreverence,  and  that  is  the  explana- 
tion of  a  great  deal  of  social  work. 

Let  me  point  out  this  general  truth, — as  I  think  it  is, — that  no  social 
work,  no  mission  work,  no  effort  at  what  we  call  betterment  in  a 
crowded  quarter,  is  at  all  worth  while  unless  it  realizes  that  the 
economic  daily  deeds  of  the  people  are  just  as  much  a  religious  ques- 
tion as  the  catechism.  We  are  shooting  in  the  air  unless  we  see 
the  connection  between  tenement  conditions  and  the  spiritual  life. 
And  let  us  at  once  make  up  our  minds  that  no  fine  church  has  any 


573 

right  to  exist  in  a  big  city,  when  human  beings  are  forced  to  live  in 
tenements.  The  great  aim  of  all  our  effort  is  not  to  reform  people 
as  though  they  need  us  to  reform  them,  but  it  is  to  make  reformers 
of  them,  bcause  they  have  the  capacity  for  leadership,  if  we  once 
stir  them  right. 

The  city  of  Boston,  through  certain  consecrated  men  and  women 
like  Charles  F.  Dole,  Miss  Vida  Scudder  of  Wellesley,  and  others, 
is  about  to  publish  through  the  Boston  School  Board  a  book  which 
is  now  in  press  and  which  I  wish  to  call  to  your  attention.  It  will 
help  us  everywhere.  It  is  called  "A  Civic  Reader  for  the  New 
American."  The  object  of  it  is  to  replace  the  "See  the  Cat"  book, 
with  which  we  insult  the  intelligence  of  the  immigrant  in  the  night 
schools,  with  the  language  of  the  environment,  with  the  language 
of  civic  duty.  And  to  my  mind  it  is  just  as  sound  pedagogy  to  teach 
the  emigrant  "See  the  ash-barrel"  as  it  is  "See  the  Constitution" — 
which  even  lawyers  cannot  understand.  So  this  new  book,  I  think, 
is  a  step  in  the  right  direction,  and  I  was  informed  that  a  prominent 
association  of  this  city  would  have  it  translated  into  Italian  as  a  civic 
document.  This  book,  through  its  chapters  on  the  health  laws  and 
the  streets  and  the  back  yards,  will  soon  show  the  people  of  our 
crowded  quarter  that,  if  they  only  know  their  rights  and  insist  upon 
them,  the  so-called  slums,  which  are  the  result  always  of  slum  city 
governments,  may  disappear,  and  we  shall  be  in  a  better  condition 
when  people  of  the  crowded  districts  will  co-operate  with  you,  well 
wishers  and  friends  of  a  better  life. 

Dr.  Hale. — I  think  every  one  in  the  audience  will  see  that,  if  we 
do  not  know  about  the  relations  which  the  native-born  American 
of  three  centuries  has  to  the  new-comer  of  the  last  five  years,  it  is 
our  own  fault,  and  not  theirs.  I  visited  myself  one  September  day 
the  Hancock-Cushman  School  at  the  North  End,  where  there  were 
306  girls  who  had  been  admitted  into  that  school  within  a  month. 
Of  the  306  girls  there  was  not  one  who  could  speak  the  English  lan- 
guage. They  were  all  the  population,  observe,  of  that  district  who 
were  entitled  to  come  to  school,  and  there  was  not  in  that  district  a 
girl  between  five  and  fifteen  who  could  speak  the  English  language 
when  she  came  there.  There  was  not  in  that  school  a  Scotch  girl 
nor  a  French  girl  nor  an  Irish  girl  nor  a  Welsh  girl.    I  was  told  that 


574 

there  was  one  French  girl  there, — yes,  Marie  was  a  French  girl,  and 
Marie  was  sent  up  to  speak  to  me.  It  turned  out  that  Marie  came 
from  Italy,  and  that  her  father  had  stopped  in  Paris  for  a  year  with 
his  family,  and  that  was  the  reason  that  a  French  girl  was  there. 

But  with  the  exception  of  that  one  "French  girl"  there  was  not  in 
the  school  of  306  girls  one  person  from  the  west  of  Europe.  Italy  was 
the  first  country.  The  next  most  largely  represented  was  Russia,  the 
next  largest  was  Germany.  There  was  a  very  respectable  number 
of  Arabs,  a  number  of  Syrians,  whose  native  language  was  that  of 
Jesus  Christ ;  but  there  was  only  one  girl  from  Western  Europe.  Now 
it  is  our  business  to  teach  those  girls  and  their  mothers  and  their 
fathers  to  become  American  citizens.  I  am  disappointed  that  we 
have  not  here  a  gentleman  from  New  York  to  tell  us  of  the  magnifi- 
cent arrangements  in  the  city  of  New  York  in  this  regard.  It  is 
the  habit  of  New  York, — I  don't  believe  there  is  a  city  in  the  world 
which  has  given  more  attention  to  such  matters, — the  gentleman  who 
has  charge  of  the  evening  lectures  in  New  York  arranges  that  every 
evening  from  the  1st  of  October  to  the  1st  of  June,  from  the  Bronx 
on  the  north  around  to  Staten  Island  and  Brooklyn  on  the  south,  there 
shall  be  free  lectures  on  the  duties  of  American  citizens  on  these 
very  matters  of  which  Mr.  Bloomfield  has  been  speaking  to  you. 
These  lecture-rooms  are  crowded  with  the  New  Americans  who 
want  to  learn  their  duties,  and  every  step  which  we  shall  take 
here  in  Boston  or  in  Eastern  Massachusetts  in  that  regard  will  be 
seconded  and  helped. 

I  think  I  will  say  that  our  meeting  has  come  to  an  end,  as  far  as 
the  president  is  concerned.  The  longer  you  stop  to  talk  with  each 
other  about  the  matter,  the  better;  and,  as  I  have  said  before,  in  the 
presence  of  Mr.  Hubbard,  of  Miss  Alice  Higgins,  and  of  other  per- 
sons who  know  about  it,  you  will  have  an  opportunity  to  find  out 
what  you  do  not  now  know.  I  thank  you  for  your  attendance  at  the 
meeting. 

The  crowded  assembly  slowly  dispersed. 


575 


RECEPTION  TO  FOREIGN  DELEGATES  AT  THE  HOTEL 
SOMERSET  ON  MONDAY  EVENING,  SEPTEMBER  23, 
AT  EIGHT  O'CLOCK. 

The  spacious  and  beautiful  hall  and  anterooms  of  the  Hotel 
Somerset  were  filled  with  a  large  company  of  foreign  and  American 
delegates  on  Monday  evening.  Only  a  stormy  evening  prevented 
a  crowded  attendance  which  would  have  been  beyond  the  capacity 
of  the  hall  and  uncomfortable  for  those  present.  In  view  of  this 
possibility  an  overflow  reception  at  Channing  Hall,  in  the  Unitarian 
Building,  had  been  somewhat  hastily  arranged  for,  which  yet  proved 
to  be  a  most  enjoyable  occasion.  Quite  a  large  company  attended 
this  second  reception,  which,  after  a  social  hour,  was  called  to  order 
by  Rev.  L.  H.  Buckshorn,  of  Concord,  N.H.,  and  addressed  by  Sir 
William  Bowring,  Fred.  Maddison,  M.P.,  Rev.  W.  G.  Tarrant,  and 
others  of  England,  and  by  Rev.  Samuel  M.  Crothers,  D.D., 
of  Cambridge,  while  a  male  quartette  interpunctuated  the 
speaking  with  cheerful  and  melodious  songs.  Later  refreshments 
were  served. 

In  the  mean  time  the  larger  gathering  of  delegates  in  Hotel  Somerset 
spent  a  delightful  hour  in  conversation  and  in  listening  to  the  music 
of  the  Bostonia  Women's  Orchestra,  consisting  of  fourteen  lady 
performers,  under  the  leadership  of  Mrs.  Belle  Y.  Renfrew,  while 
the  picturesque  costumes  of  the  Oriental  delegates,  and  the  toilettes 
of  the  ladies,  relieved  the  sombre  dress-coats  and  preacher's  garb  of 
the  sterner  sex.  Governor  Guild,  of  Massachusetts,  President  and 
Mrs.  S.  A.  Eliot,  gave  an  informal  welcome  to  the  new-comers,  until 
at  near  nine  o'clock  those  present  were  called  to  order  by  the  ushers, 
who  consisted  of  the  following  members  of  the  Channing  Club: 
Percy  A.  Atherton,  J.  Russell  Abbott,  A.  L.  Coburn,  W.  H.  Coburn, 
Frank  T.  Fay,  Parker  B.  Field,  George  B.  Fox,  Henry  A.  Gordon, 
Courtenay  Guild,  Walter  M.  Hatch,  Henry  F.  Howe,  Henry  S.  King, 
A.  W.  Moors,  Henry  C.  Noble,  Augustus  S.  Nye,  Edward  Orchard, 


576 

Charles  O.  Richardson,  Everett  W.  Stone,  Dr.  E.  C.  Wylie,  Arthur  B. 
Porter,  Walter  H.  Bowker,  Frederick  W.  Porter.  Mr.  J.  S.  Beatley 
kindly  took  charge  of  the  musical  part  of  the  program.  The  Chair- 
man of  the  Local  Committee  and  President  of  the  Congress,  Rev. 
S.  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  first  took  the  word. 


REV.    SAMUEL  A.    ELIOT,   D.D. 

My  Friends, — It  is  a  great  pleasure  to  me  and  to  the  lady  I  have 
the  honor  to  love  to  greet  you  here  to-night.  But  I  shall  not  detain 
you  with  any  speech.  My  text  I  can  find  in  the  Book  of  Ecclesi- 
asticus:  "When  thou  art  chosen  to  be  master  of  a  feast,  lift  not 
thy  voice  up;  be  among  them  as  one  that  knoweth  and  holdeth  his 
tongue."    [Laughter.] 

I  shall  pause  only  to  present  to  you  one  who  can  more  adequately 
and  effectively  welcome  you.  We  who  are  the  fortunate  dwellers  in 
the  oldest  and  most  prosperous  democracy  in  the  New  World  honor 
the  governor  of  this  Commonwealth,  with  his  force  of  character,  his 
disinterested  courage,  his  untiring,  public-spirited  zeal.  And,  when 
I  have  used  those  phrases,  I  have  simply  described  a  representative 
Unitarian  ["Hear,  hear,"  and  applause],  one  of  a  long  line  of  gov- 
ernors of  Massachusetts  who  have  owned  their  allegiance  to  spiritual 
freedom.  I  have  the  honor  of  presenting  to  you  our  beloved  com- 
rade and  fellow-worker,  Curtis  Guild,  Jr.,  Governor  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  Massachusetts.  [Applause;  "Hail  to  the  Chief"  played 
by  the  orchestra.] 

CURTIS   GUILD,  JR.,    GOVERNOR  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — Such  an  introduction,  so 
far  beyond  my  deserts,  leaves  me  almost  in  the  position  of  the  fortu- 
nate lover  in  Shakespeare's  comedy,  who,  having  attained  his  desire, 
was  struck  dumb.  On  being  asked  if  he  had  no  words  in  which  he 
could  express  his  happiness,  he  replied,  "Silence  is  the  perfectest 
herald  of  joy. "    [Laughter.] 

But  I  have  a  duty  to  perform  to-night, — a  duty  which  is  also  a 
pleasure  and  a  privilege,— of  extending  to  this  gathering  from  the 
four  quarters  of  the  earth  for  the  uplift  of  religion  and  citizenship 


577 

and  morality  the  heartiest  welcome  from  the  Governor  of  Massa- 
chusetts. And  where,  indeed,  should  such  a  gathering  be  more 
welcome  than  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Horace  Mann,  of  Emerson, 
and  of  Channing?  It  has  been  our  pleasure  this  year,  the  year  of 
an  American  international  exposition,  to  entertain  in  the  Common- 
wealth many  distinguished  guests  from  many  lands,  and  among  our 
cosmopolitan  people — for  we  are  drawn  from  all  the  races — we  trust 
that  here  in  Massachusetts  there  is  not  one  of  you  who  will  not  feel 
that  he  is  not  in  a  foreign  country,  but  thoroughly  at  home.  ["Hear, 
hear!"  applause.] 

There  can  be  nothing  more  promising  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 
splendid  prophecy  of  our  British  cousin  across  the  sea,  the  great 
laureate,  who  spoke  of  "the  Parliament  of  man,  the  Federation  of 
the  world,"  than  the  constant  repetition  nowadays  of  these  inter- 
national conventions.  And,  surely,  the  day  of  that  millennium  has 
almost  dawned,  though  Tennyson  never  lived  to  see  it,  when  the 
nations  of  the  earth  that  first  began  to  gather  together  in  a  common 
cause  beneath  the  red  cross  of  mercy  have  learned  to  gather  together 
under  the  white  cross  of  universal  peace.  ["Hear,  hear!"  applause.] 
And  in  that  spirit  I  trust  you  will  regard  yourselves  at  home,  and  accept 
a  hearty  welcome.  I  trust,  too,  that  in  these  deliberations  upon 
liberal  religion  we  shall  dwell  not  so  much  on  the  adjective,  but 
on  the  noun;  not  so  much  on  the  liberality  of  our  religion,  but  on 
our  religion  itself;  not  so  much  as  to  what  a  Unitarian  does  not 
believe,  but  more  emphatically  as  to  what  a  Unitarian  does  believe. 
[Applause.] 

No  nation  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  has  ever  been  success- 
ful, has  ever  achieved  a  noble  end,  which  has  cut  loose  its  ties  from 
religion.  When  the  Greek  tragedian  put  into  the  mouth  of  his 
actress,  "By  Zeus — if  there  is  such  a  person,"  the  republic  that 
Pericles  had  honored  was  ripe  for  its  fall.  When  the  Roman  augurs 
smiled  as  they  met  each  other  across  the  altar,  the  republic  was  ready 
for  its  Caesar.  And,  when  the  temples  of  religion  gave  way  for  the 
actress  and  the  worship  of  the  so-called  Goddess  of  Reason,  the 
thriving  French  republic,  which  had  risen  on  the  rights  of  man, 
became  the  red  terror  that  was  to  threaten  the  peace  of  all  the  world. 
And  so  I  trust  that  we  shall  emphasize  more  particularly  the  noun 
rather  than  the  adjective. 


578 

It  has  been  the  fortune  of  Massachusetts  in  the  past, — let  us  trust 
it  may  be  her  good  fortune  in  the  present, — and  you  know  one  good- 
natured  English  satirist  has  said  of  us  Yankees  that  we  never  can 
make  a  speech  without  praising  ourselves  or  our  country  [laughter], — 
it  has  been  the  good  fortune  of  Massachusetts  to  furnish  perhaps 
rather  more  than  her  share  to  the  literary  and  educational  side  of 
the  development  of  the  great  American  republic.  It  was  my  good 
fortune  a  few  months  ago  to  stand  by  the  side  of  the  governor  of 
New  York  at  the  dedication  of  twelve  tablets  in  the  Temple  of  Fame 
in  the  University  of  New  York  on  those  beautiful  heights  above  the 
Hudson.  Of  the  twelve  representative  Americans  to  whom  those 
bronze  tablets  were  dedicated,  five  came  from  other  States,  seven 
came  from  the  single  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts.  [Applause.] 
Not  a  single  one  of  those  seven  names  was  the  name  of  a  great  soldier; 
not  a  single  one  of  those  seven  names  was  the  name  of  a  great  admiral. 
Only  one  of  those  seven  names  was  the  name  of  a  great  statesman. 
Six  of  the  seven  names  were  of  those  who  had  earned  international 
laurels  as  poets,  as  scientists,  as  educators;  as  promoters  not  of  the 
material,  but  of  the  ideal,  of  the  lofty  thought  which  makes  a  nation 
not  rich,  but  great  in  the  truest  sense  of  greatness.  [Applause.]  By 
the  promotion  of  such  ideals,  by  the  inspiration  of  an  honest  and 
sincere  religion  and  the  respect  for  every  other  man's  sincere  con- 
victions in  religion,  does  any  country  go  forward  and  can  we  hope 
to  make  the  "Parliament  of  man,  the  Federation  of  the  world,"  an 
accomplished  fact.  For,  when  man  once  learns  to  lose  his  respect 
for  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  his  respect  for  the  brotherhood  of  man 
grows  lesser  and  lesser.  And  if  we  can  but  keep  true  to  our  ideals, 
keep  true  to  the  lofty  thought  of  all  the  nations  and  all  the  ages 
that  have  led  men  upward  and  onward,  we  shall  realize  that  progress 
of  which  Emerson  spoke:  "When  the  cannon  is  aimed  by  ideas, 
when  men  of  religious  convictions  are  behind  it,  when  men  die  for 
what  they  live  for,  and  the  main-spring  which  works  daily  urges 
them  to  hazard  all,  then  the  cannon  echoes  this  conception  with  the 
voice  of  a  man,  and  the  rifle  seconds  the  cannon  and  the  fowling- 
piece  the  rifle,  and  the  women  make  the  cartridges,  and  all  shoot  at 
one  mark;  then  gods  join  in  the  conflict,  then  poets  are  born,  and 
the  better  code  of  laws  at  last  proclaims  the  victory."    [Applause.] 


579 

President  Eliot. — It  has  been  a  peculiar  privilege  to  welcome  here 
so  large  and  distinguished  a  delegation  from  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland.  And  it  is  on  such  occasions  as  this  that  for  us  Americans 
the  word  of  the  poet  is  fulfilled,  and 

Our  English  blood  its  rights  reclaims; 
In  vain  the  sea  its  barriers  rears, 

Our  pride  is  fed  on  England's  fame; 
Ours  are  her  triumphs  and  her  tears, 
And  ours  her  length  of  glorious  years. 

I  am  going  to  ask  for  a  few  words  of  greeting  from  the  leader  of  the 
English  delegation,  the  President  of  the  British  and  Foreign  Uni- 
tarian Association,  Sir  William  Bo  wring.  [Applause;  "God  save 
the  King!"  played  by  the  orchestra;  display  of  the  British  flag.] 

SIR  WILLIAM  BOWRING,   BART. 

Mr.  President,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — I  have  the  honor,  sir,  as 
you  have  said,  to  represent  the  British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  As- 
sociation. The  aims  and  the  objects  of  the  British  and  Foreign 
Unitarian  Association  are  precisely  the  same  as  those  of  your  Ameri- 
can Unitarian  Association,  and  I  think  you  will  all  agree  that  those 
aims  and  those  objects  are  worthy  of  both  institutions.  We,  the 
British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association,  can  claim  a  more  ex- 
tended sphere,  very  large  as  your  sphere  is,  but  we  have  a  larger 
population,  and  we  have  a  larger  territory  to  look  after,  and  we  have 
a  great  and  noble  work  to  do.  But,  sir,  we  are  here  as  aliens,  yet  we 
almost  smile  at  the  idea  of  being  foreigners.  ["Hear,  hear!"]  We 
hear  our  own  language  spoken,  we  hear  our  own  ideals,  if  I  might 
call  it  so,  idealized,  and  we  are  very  much  and  very  happily  at  home. 
We  have  received  a  bounteous  welcome,  and  we  have  met  many, 
many  dear  friends. 

Boston  is  a  historic  city,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned.  It  has  taught 
our  country  many  great  lessons.  You  will  all  remember  an  incident 
in  the  tea  trade  that  happened  in  Boston.  That,  ladies  and  gentle- 
men, lighted  a  flame  the  effects  of  which  were  not  confined  to  your 
country  ["Hear,  hear!"],  but  was  one  of  the  greatest  blessings  that 
ever  was  conferred  on  Great  Britain.  Great  Britain  is  the  great 
colonizing  country  of  the  world.    But  for  Boston  it  would  not  have 


58o 

taken  on  those  duties  in  the  way  it  has  done.  And  I  would  like  to 
call  to  your  recollection  the  latest  example  of  the  brilliancy, — I 
am  eulogistic,  you  see, — the  brilliancy  of  British  colonization.  You 
will  all  have  read  of  the  fearful  and  horrible  war  which  was  con- 
ducted in  South  Africa,  and  I  and  many  with  me  were  in  danger  for 
opposing  that  war  and  thinking  it  unjust  and  unrighteous.  ["  Hear, 
hear ! "  applause.]  The  latest  example  of  the  lesson  that  was  taught 
us  by  you  in  Boston  is  that  we  met  our  late  enemies  and  we  gave  them 
constitutional  government  and  self-rule.  [Applause.]  And,  sir, 
that  was  a  noble  thing  for  Great  Britain  to  do.  I  do  not  know 
whether  you  have  heard  it  in  your  country,  but  there  is  an  incident 
which  seems  to  me  very  touching.  Recently  an  enormous  diamond 
was  found  in  South  Africa,  the  biggest  diamond  in  the  world.  The 
premier  of  the  Transvaal  government  is  General  Botha,  one  of  the 
most  brilliant  generals  that  conducted  the  war  against  Great  Britain. 
He  conceived  the  idea  that  the  Transvaal  government  should  pur- 
chase that  diamond  and  give  it  to  the  King  of  England,  to  be  placed 
in  England's  crown.  Now,  Mr.  President,  in  my  opinion  the  action 
of  giving  to  the  Transvaal  and  the  Orange  Free  State  responsible 
government  was  a  more  brilliant  ornament  in  the  crown  of  Great 
Britain  than  even  the  biggest  diamond  in  the  world.     [Applause.] 

Mr.  President,  this  is  the  third  Congress  that  I  have  been  privi- 
leged to  attend.  I  think  I  have  had  the  pleasure  of  meeting  you  at 
two  previously.  The  one  was  in  the  historic  country  of  Holland 
with  an  ancient  history,  a  picturesque  people,  and  a  picturesque 
country.  We  had  very  fine  experiences  there.  We  believe  that  that 
conference  did  a  vast  amount  of  good.  The  next  conference  was  held 
in  Geneva.  I  always  look  upon  Geneva  as  the  Mecca  of  Middle 
Age  religious  freedom.  We  had  a  very  good  time,  as  your  Presi- 
dent knows,  in  Geneva.  But  a  very  singular  circumstance  hap- 
pened there.  One  of  our  sessions  was  held  in  the  very  room  that  was 
occupied  by  the  delegates  who  were  to  arbitrate  on,  I  think,  the  first 
great  international  arbitration  that  has  occurred  in  the  world.  That 
was  the  arbitration  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  in 
reference  to  the  "Alabama  "  claims.  That  was  an  action  on  the  part 
of  these  two  great  States  which  was  creditable  to  both.  It  is  past 
history  now,  but  the  record  of  that  arbitration  lives  on  in  the  history 
of  the  world.    ["Hear,  hear!"] 


58i 

Now  this  conference  comes  to  the  modern  Mecca  of  religious 
freedom.  We  come  to  Boston,  the  historic  city  of  Boston,  the  home 
of  Channing,  the  home  of  Theodore  Parker,  Emerson,  and  many 
other  men  and  women  of  saintly  lives  who  have  departed  from  us, 
but  who,  in  my  country  and  in  all  Europe,  are  household  words  to 
all  of  us.  Mr.  President,  there  are  living  men  that  we  worship  also. 
I  was  present  last  night  at  one  of  the  vastest  and  grandest  meetings 
that  I  have  had  the  pleasure, — and  I  am  not  inexperienced  in  attend- 
ing public  meetings, — that  I  ever  had  the  opportunity  of  attending. 
And,  sir,  I  listened  to  the  words  of  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Hale.  You 
will  notice  I  call  him  Right  Reverend.  He  may  not  think  it  is  ex- 
actly the  proper  title,  because,  you  know,  our  right  reverends  have 
been  obstructionists  to  reform  for  centuries.  [Great  laughter  and  ap- 
plause.] And  what  a  meeting  it  was  last  night!  It  was  an  inspir- 
ing meeting,  a  meeting  that  I  am  sure  will  do  a  vast  amount  of  good 
to  our  cause  and  to  liberal  religion.  I  do  not  think  there  is  another 
city  in  the  whole  world  where  you  could  produce  so  large  an  au- 
dience composed  of  free  religious  thinkers  as  we  had  last  evening. 

And  then  we  had  another  remarkable  man  there.  We  had — and 
I  was  delighted  to  hear  him:  I  have  read  a  good  deal  about  him — 
Dr.  Booker  Washington  on  the  great  problem, — and  I  think  you  all 
admit  it  is  a  great  problem,  which  will  take  all  the  statesmanship 
and  all  the  sympathy  that  you  can  bring  to  bear  upon  it.  I  hope 
we  that  listened  to  him  all  put  up  a  devout  prayer  that  he  and  his 
colleagues  may  long  live  to  solve  the  most  difficult  problem  that  is 
before  you.  I  think,  Mr.  President,  that  he  is  well  named.  He  is 
called  Washington.  Now  I  remember  there  was  another  Washing- 
ton who  was  called  the  Father  of  his  Country.  Now  is  it  not  pos- 
sible that  this  man  may  live  in  history  as  the  father  of  his  race? 
[Applause.] 

I  have  occupied  too  much  of  your  time,  and  I  have  not  at  all  com- 
menced the  subject  that  I  ought  to  have  commenced  at  the  very  first. 
I  am  here  as  a  delegate  from  Great  Britain,  and  I  have  many  com- 
panions here.  We  are  delighted  with  our  visit.  ["Hear,  hear!"] 
I  venture  to  say  that  this  visit  to  Boston  will  live  in  our  memories 
as  long  as  we  are  permitted  to  live.  We  thank  you  most  heartily 
for  your  kind  reception.  We  thank  you,  and  we  admire  you,  we  ad- 
mire you  exceedingly,  for  the  magnificent  way  in  which  you  have 


582 

organized  these  various  events  that  have  done  so  much  to  make  us 
happy  and  comfortable.  We  thank  you  from  the  bottom  of  our 
hearts,  and  we  shall  never  forget  our  visit  to  Boston.    [Applause.] 

At  this  point  in  the  meeting  Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendte,  General 
Secretary  of  the  International  Council,  took  charge  of  the  intro- 
ductions. 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — The  Congress  in 
whose  social  interest  we  are  met  this  evening  has  these  distinguishing 
marks, — it  is  a  congress  of  religious  liberals,  with  a  strong  emphasis 
on  the  word  religious,  and  it  is  international  and  interdenominational 
in  character.  Our  gathering  to-night  is  participated  in  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  fifteen  or  twenty  nationalities  and  some  thirty  church 
fellowships.  Many  of  our  delegates  have  come  long  distances  and 
made  no  small  sacrifice  to  attend  this  conference  of  the  friends  of 
religious  freedom  and  enlightenment.  We  bid  them  a  hearty  wel- 
come, one  and  all.  It  would  have  been  a  great  pleasure  to  us  to  have 
taken  them  severally  by  the  hand  and  formed  their  personal  acquaint- 
ance, but,  since  this  is  manifestly  impossible  in  so  large  and  crowded 
an  assembly,  we  must  content  ourselves  with  a  general  introduction 
and  a  few  brief  responses  from  our  fellow-delegates  from  abroad. 

The  delegation  from  Great  Britain,  numbering  some  120  per- 
sons, has  already  been  presented  to  you.  Let  us  turn  to  the  Conti- 
nental nations  of  Europe. 

There  is  no  country  to  which  liberal  and  progressive  religion  is 
under  such  profound  obligations  as  to  Germany.  It  is  sufficient 
to  mention  only  the  names  of  Lessing,  Kant,  Goethe,  Schleiermacher, 
Strauss,  Rothe,  and  Schenkel  to  remind  you  how  great  and  uni- 
versal is  our  indebtedness  to  the  scholarship,  philosophy,  and  science 
of  Germany. 

The  New  England  Transcendentalism,  which  had  its  chief  seat 
here  in  Boston,  and  so  profoundly  influenced  and  liberalized  Ameri- 
can religion,  was  derived  in  very  large  degree  from  German  sources. 

We  are  honored  in  having  with  us  this  evening  distinguished 
representatives  of  German  culture  and  piety,  who  at  its  universities 
and  in  its  pulpits  keep  up  its  traditions  of  genuine  scholarship, 
freedom  of  investigation,  and  a  fearless  utterance  of  the  truth. 


5«3 

I  take  especial  pleasure  in  introducing  to  you  this  evening  Professor 
Otto  Pfleiderer,  of  the  University  of  Berlin,  the  philosophic  his- 
torian of  religion,  the  warm  friend  of  our  Congress,  the  honored 
teacher  and  helper  of  those  who  in  all  lands  labor  to  increase  the 
knowledge,  purify  the  content,  and  enlarge  the  boundaries  of  true 
religion.  Also  his  fellow-worker  for  religious  truth  and  liberty, 
Professor  Martin  Rade,  of  the  theological  faculty  of  the  University 
of  Marburg,  the  editor  as  well  of  Die  Christliche  Welt, — The  Chris- 
tian World, — the  liberal  religious  journal  of  largest  circulation  in 
Germany.  Our  new-gained  friend  unites  in  himself  the  thorough 
and  conscientious  scholarship  of  the  German  university  teacher 
with  those  gifts  of  popular  expression  and  the  organization  of  lib- 
eral sentiment  which  make  his  labors  peculiarly  helpful  to  our 
cause  in  the  land  of  Luther. 

Finally,  I  present  to  you  the  Rev.  Dr.  Max  Fischer,  pastor  of 
St.  Mark's  Church  in  Berlin,  who  represents  to  us  the  liberal  sen- 
timent in  the  German  pulpit,  and  has  himself  been  the  brave  ex- 
ponent of  modern  ideas  and  the  victim  of  ecclesiastical  persecu- 
tion. He  brings  us  the  greetings  of  our  sister-organization,  the 
German  Protestantenverein,  and  an  invitation  from  the  religious 
liberals  of  his  native  country  to  hold  our  next  Congress  on  Ger- 
man soil. 

Professor  Pfleiderer  will  kindly  respond  for  his  countrymen. 
[Applause;  "Die  Wacht  am  Rhein"  by  the  band;  and  a  display  of 
the  German  colors.] 

Professor  Pfleiderer,  in  the  course  of  an  extended  address  in  Ger- 
man, expressed  the  acknowledgments  and  greetings  of  the  German 
delegates  present.  He  spoke  briefly  of  the  state  of  religious  liberalism 
in  Germany,  which  would  form  the  subject  of  special  papers  before 
the  Congress.  He  dwelt  next  upon  the  services  which  the  German 
critical  and  historic  sciences  had  rendered  to  religious  philosophy. 
The  transcendental  teachings  of  a  Lessing,  Kant,  Fichte,  Schleier- 
macher,  Hegel,  were  primary  sources  of  the  transcendental  phi- 
losophy of  New  England,  whose  greatest  expositor  was  Ralph  Waldo 
Emerson.  Professor  Pfleiderer  stated  that  during  his  present  visit  to 
the  United  States  he  had  acquainted  himself  more  fully  with  the 
writings  of  this  eminent  thinker  and  the  school  to  which  he  be- 


584 

longed.  He  had  been  greatly  impressed  by  his  power  of  spiritual 
insight  and  intellectual  ability.  In  rapid  outlines  the  speaker 
sketched  the  main  teachings  of  Emerson,  and  declared  that  they 
were  identical  with  those  of  the  most  advanced  and  scientific  think- 
ing of  idealistic  German  philosophers  to-day,  and,  moreover,  in 
his  opinion,  were  the  conceptions  and  beliefs  which  would,  in  the 
main,  characterize  the  absolute  and  ultimate  religion  of  mankind. 
[Applause.] 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — In  these  days,  as  so  often  in  history, 
the  eyes  of  all  lovers  of  human  liberty  and  progress  throughout 
the  world  are  fixed  with  admiration  and  sympathy  upon  France, 
engaged  in  a  splendid  struggle  to  uphold  the  paramount  interests 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  free  education  and  national  soli- 
darity against  a  pretentious  hierarchy  and  a  mediaeval  theology  which 
is  no  longer  adequate  to  the  spiritual  needs  of  enlightened  men 
or  the  moral  welfare  of  the  people.  Here  in  Boston,  especially, 
we  cherish  an  affectionate  interest  in  our  sister  republic  across  the 
sea,  our  ancient  ally  in  the  establishment  of  republican  institutions 
on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  One  of  the  proudest  days  in  the  history 
of  Boston  was  the  visit  of  General  LaFayette  to  this  city  on  the 
17th  of  June,  1825,  to  assist  in  laying  the  corner-stone  of  the  Bunker 
Hill  monument.  His  repeated  visits  to  Boston  are  commemorated 
by  the  name  LaFayette  Mall,  borne  by  one  of  the  principal  walks 
of  our  historic  city  park,  the  Common. 

We  are  fortunate  in  counting  among  the  delegates  to  our  Congress 
several  leading  representatives  of  the  public  spirit  and  religious 
enlightenment  of  our  sister  nation. 

Permit  me  to  introduce  to  you  Professor  Bonet-Maury,  of  the 
University  of  Paris,  eminent  as  a  scholar  and  divine,  and  so  beloved 
by  his  fellow-members  in  the  Congress  that,  as  one  has  said,  we 
welcome  Professor  Bonet-Maury  in  a  manner  con  amore.  He  brings 
us  the  greetings  of  his  church,  the  Church  of  the  Huguenots  in 
France,  whose  heroic  testimony  to  the  gospel  of  Jesus  and  devotion 
to  the  Protestant  cause  are  among  the  most  splendid  chapters  in 
Christian  history. 

Also  Professor  Jean  R^vtlle,  of  the  College  of  France,  author  and 
editor,  the  distinguished  son  of  an  even  more  distinguished  father, 


5»5 

whose  united  services  to  liberal  Protestantism  have  made  them 
justly  beloved  and  honored  among  us. 

And,  finally,  let  me  present  to  you  one  in  whom  we  do  not  know 
whether  to  admire  most  his  intellectual  gifts  or  his  personal  courage 
and  devotion  to  truth,  Abbe"  A.  Houtest,  the  ardent  lover  of  his 
own  Church,  the  Roman  Catholic,  which  he  desires  to  see  once 
more  the  inspirer  and  leader  of  universal  Christendom,  and  in 
whose  higher  interest  he  desires  to  address  our  Congress. 

Professor  ReVille  will  kindly  respond  for  his  nation.  [Applause; 
band,  "Le  Marseillaise";  and  display  of  the  tri-color.] 

Professor  ReVille,  who  spoke  in  French,  said:  "I  bring  the  greetings 
of  my  French  friends  and  co-religionists  to  the  Congress  and  to  the 
religious  liberals  of  America.  The  latter  are  known  to  them,  even  if 
they  are  not  able  to  meet  them  at  this  Congress  in  Boston, — known  to 
them  through  their  works,  their  zeal  for  the  cause  of  liberal  religion. 
Our  honored  President,  Dr.  Eliot,  is  known  to  us  personally  through 
his  presence  at  our  Congress  at  Amsterdam.  We  have  learned  to 
appreciate  in  him  a  splendid  type  of  a  free  but  religious  thinker  and 
man;  also  our  Secretary,  Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte,  who  has  really  been 
the  soul  of  these  Congresses,  and  to  whom  the  international  brother- 
hood of  religious  liberals  is  immensely  indebted 

In  France  there  exists  a  sincere  friendship  for  America,  for  we  know 
how  much  the  world  owes  to  America  for  the  cause  of  freedom  and 
democracy.  We  are  favored  in  having  in  Paris,  throughout  the  year, 
the  visits  of  a  great  many  Americans,  who  enjoy  our  capital  and  who 
bring  your  country  nearer  to  us. 

It  is  a  curious  thing,  from  an  historical  point  of  view,  to  see  a  son 
of  the  Huguenots,  like  myself,  greeting  in  this  great  International 
Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  the  descendants  of  the  Pilgrims  and 
the  Puritans.  It  is  truly  encouraging  for  liberal  Christians  to  note 
how  the  cause  of  liberty  is  ever  gaining  new  adherents  throughout 
the  civilized  world.  Such  encouragement  we  need,  since  we  are 
still  a  'little  flock'  in  all  countries." 

Professor  Rdville  closed  with  a  fervent  appeal  for  faithfulness  to 
the  high  and  holy  cause  which  had  been  committed  to  them  and 
undiminished  hope  in  its  increasing  victory.  He  referred  to  the 
words  just  spoken  by  his  Excellency  the  Governor, — that  the  Con- 


586 

gress  should  place  the  emphasis  on  the  religiousness  of  its  liberty 
even  more  than  on  the  liberality  of  its  religion.  So  only  could  we 
contribute  in  our  respective  countries,  and  all  over  the  world,  to 
the  extension  of  truth,  the  practice  of  justice,  and  the  diffusion  of 
high  moral  and  religious  ideals. 

Rev.  Charles.  W.  Wendte. — In  no  country  have  the  principles 
and  aims  of  our  Congress  been  more  generously  espoused  or  found 
more  devoted  friends  and  allies  than  in  Holland,  the  ancient  seat 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty.  As  the  scene,  in  these  latter  days,  of 
the  epoch-making  labors  of  a  Kuenen,  Scholten,  Tiele,  and  Oort 
in  Biblical  and  theological  science,  it  was  only  natural  that  our 
second  Congress  should  be  held  in  Amsterdam,  where  we  were 
received  with  a  hospitality  of  mind  and  heart  which  will  ever  be 
one  of  our  most  treasured  memories.  To-day  the  sons  of  the  Puri- 
tans, who  once  found  shelter  and  kindness  among  the  free  and  tol- 
erant Dutch  people,  welcome  to  this  ancient  and  Puritan  city,  now 
the  stronghold  of  religious  liberty  in  the  United  States,  the  represent- 
atives of  the  liberal  churches  of  Holland.  One  title  at  least  we  have 
to  their  interest  and  regard, — that  Boston  was  the  home  of  the  great 
historian  of  the  Dutch  Republic,  John  Lothrop  Motley,  in  whose 
glowing  pages  the  hardy  virtues,  the  love  of  liberty,  and  the  deep 
religiousness  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Netherlands  have  been  for- 
ever immortalized  to  English-speaking  peoples. 

I  have  the  honor  of  introducing  to  you  Professor  Dr.  H.  U.  Mey- 
boom,  an  eminent  scholar  and  teacher  of  the  University  of  Groningen; 
Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  the  successor  of  the  gifted  Tiele  at  the 
ancient  University  of  Leiden;  the  Rev.  P.  H.  Hugenholtz,  of  Am- 
sterdam, to  whom  the  success  of  our  second  Congress  was  in  such 
great  degree  owing;  the  Rev.  F.  C.  Fleischer,  another  true  friend 
of  our  cause,  a  philanthropist  and  a  leader  in  the  Mennonite  Church 
of  his  country;  Mr.  R.  L.  Worst,  of  Dutch  Guiana;  and,  finally, 
Miss  Van  Eyck,  of  the  Dutch  Postal  Mission. 

I  will  call  on  Professor  Meyboom  to  respond.  [Applause;  band, 
Dutch  national  air;  and  display  of  the  Dutch  standard.] 


5«7 


PROFESSOR  MEYBOOM. 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen, — As  it  is  laid  upon  me  to  bring  you  the 
greetings  of  all  the  congenial  spirits  among  my  compatriots,  I  have  to 
beg  your  pardon  for  many  mistakes,  perhaps,  in  my  English,  and  at 
all  events  for  my  bad  pronunciation.  I  am  really  fearing  that  you 
will  not  understand  me.  I  cannot  but  hope  that,  as  our  Dutch  prov- 
erb says,  good  understanders  need  only  half-words,  and,  moreover, 
that  your  charity  will  endure  many  sins. 

Years  ago,  having  to  perform  a  task  of  the  same  kind  at  Hamburg, 
I  prided  myself  and  ventured  to  say  to  the  Germans  that,  if  they  had 
any  notion  of  the  liberties  we  Dutchmen  enjoyed  and  the  spiritual 
progress  we  made,  they  would  see  my  face  as  it  had  been  the  face  of 
an  angel.  Now,  being  a  messenger  in  America,  the  noise  of  your  rail- 
ways and  the  height  of  your  sky-scrapers  would  take  me  down  a 
peg  or  two.  [Laughter.]  But  your  own  Rev.  Mr.  Sunderland  en- 
courages me  by  proclaiming  the  Netherlands  the  country  that  more 
than  any  other,  and  before  any  other  land,  achieved  well  all  kinds 
of  liberty.  At  least,  he  leads  me  into  the  temptation  to  apply  an- 
other expression  of  ours:  I  am  too  polite  to  contradict  you.  Really, 
we  have  a  glorious  history  and  a  most  promising  present.  We  are 
the  people  of  the  eighty  years'  war  and  of  the  Remonstrance.  And 
now  we  have  our  Protestantenbond  and  our  Free  community.  I 
dare  say  we  are  perhaps  the  only  people  who  expelled,  theoretically 
at  least,  the  Catholic  leaven  from  our  ideal  of  the  Church,  the  conditio 
sine  qua  non  of  the  future  flock  under  one  shepherd. 

As  a  representative  of  a  great  part  of  my  country,  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  Mennonite  and  Arminian  fraternities,  of  the  Protestanten- 
bond and  Free  communities,  of  the  liberal  part  of  our  Dutch  Reformed 
National  and  our  Lutheran  churches,  I  give  homage  to  the  liberal 
thinkers  and  workers  meeting  at  this  Religious  Congress.  I  give 
homage  to  America,  the  first  to  conceive  the  idea  of  an  interna- 
tional exchange  of  liberal  thoughts  and  feeling.  I  give  homage  to 
Boston,  offering  hospitality  to  so  many  delegates  from  all  countries. 
I  am  sure  of  your  success.  The  spirit  of  Channing  and  Parker, 
hovering  over  us,  warrants  it.  Vers  le  cceur  de  I'AmSrique  are  di- 
rected the  tender  ties  and  the  aspirations  of  all  our  Congress  mem- 
bers.    On  the  other  hand,  le  caur  de  VAm&rique  is  beating  toward  all 


588 

of  us.  A  higher  unity  unites  us.  No  oppressive  fetters  shall  bind 
us.  We  shall  be  as  in  Abraham's  bosom,  and  then  we  will  return 
to  our  own  countries,  and  set  forth  the  propaganda  of  the — not 
American  or  Dutch,  but  only  humanitarian  way  of  liberal  thinking 
and  working,  of  free  religious  feeling  and  living!    [Applause.] 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — The  name  of  Switzerland  awakens  visions 
of  scenic  beauty  and  grandeur,  traditions  of  freedom,  virtue,  and 
heroism  which  inspire  and  quicken  humanity  forever. 

In  the  literary  and  scientific  annals  of  Boston  it  is  linked  with  de- 
lightful memories  of  the  genius  and  geniality  of  Louis  Agassiz,  most 
gifted  of  students  of  nature  and  most  lovable  of  men.  For  many 
years  he  was  an  honored  teacher  at  Harvard  University.  Those 
of  us  who  were  privileged  to  hear  him  lecture  remember  that  he  had 
no  love  for  the  new  theory  of  Mr.  Darwin,  which,  in  his  somewhat 
imperfect  English,  he  persisted  in  calling  "the  devel-opment  of 
species";  but  I  am  sure  his  spirit  rejoices  with  ours  to-night  in  this 
spectacle  of  religious  development  and  international  fraternity. 

Permit  me  to  introduce  to  you  his  fellow-countrymen  and  dele- 
gates to  our  Congress,  the  Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer,  pastor  of  one  of 
the  largest  churches  in  Zurich,  and  for  many  years  president  of  the 
Swiss  Verein  fuer  freies  Christentum;  Rev.  L.  Ragaz,  minister  at  the 
cathedral  in  Basel;  Rev.  L.  E.  T.  Andre,  pastor  of  the  Swiss-Italian 
church  in  Florence,  Italy,  in  whose  cemetery  the  sacred  dust  of 
Theodore  Parker  and  Mrs.  Browning  reposes;  Rev.  E.  Rochat,  a 
pastor  of  Geneva,  secretary  of  our  third  Congress  in  Geneva  two 
years  ago ;  and  last,  but  not  least,  Professor  E.  Montet,  dean  of  the 
Theological  Faculty  of  the  University  of  Geneva,  the  honored  presi- 
dent of  that  Congress,  whose  success  was  largely  due  to  his  personal 
exertion  and  influence. 

Professor  Montet  will  reply  for  our  sister  republic.  [Applause; 
band,  Swiss  national  air;  and  display  of  the  national  colors  of 
Switzerland.] 

Professor  Montet  said  that  he  spoke  as  a  representative  of  the 
liberal  Protestantism  of  Switzerland,  as  well  as  the  president  of  the 
last  International  Congress  at  Geneva  in  1905. 

As  representing  the  liberal  Christians  of  Switzerland,  he  was  the 


5»9 

bearer  to  the  Congress  at  Boston  of  the  greetings  of  the  Swiss  Asso- 
ciation for  a  Free  Christianity, — an  association  extended  over  all  of 
Switzerland,  and  which  included  several  thousand  members.  He 
bore  also  the  greetings  of  the  liberal  pastors  of  the  National  Protes- 
tant Church,  Geneva,  and  the  liberal  professors  of  the  Theological 
Faculty  of  the  University  of  Geneva.  There  is  at  Geneva  only  one 
great  church,  the  National  Protestant,  in  which  all  tendencies  of 
thought  (liberal  and  orthodox)  are  represented  and  live  together 
fraternally.  In  the  same  way  in  the  Theological  Faculty,  a  faculty 
under  the  State,  the  two  tendencies  are  represented.  The  Protest- 
ants of  Switzerland  are  very  well  satisfied  with  this  order  of  things, 
and  love  their  National  Church  and  their  National  Theological 
Faculty. 

As  president  of  the  last  Congress,  Professor  Montet,  after  having 
reviewed  briefly  the  work  accomplished  by  the  International  Council, 
described  the  fruits  of  the  Congress  at  Geneva,  more  particularly  in 
that  city  itself. 

In  Geneva,  as  in  Switzerland,  as  everywhere,  religious  liberalism 
is  in  a  minority,  but  exercises  a  considerable  influence.  This  influ- 
ence has  sensibly  grown  since  the  last  Congress,  and  the  liberal  spirit 
permeates  the  entire  National  Church  and  all  religious  circles.  This 
liberal  spirit  especially  displays  itself  in  the  project  of  erecting  a 
splendid  monument  of  John  Calvin  and  the  Reformation  in  the  name 
of  all  Protestants  who  trace  their  derivation  to  his  school  of  religious 
thought. 

It  was  the  liberal  Protestants  who  were  the  initiators  of  this  project, 
and  they  have  united  with  them  all  the  Protestants  of  Calvinistic 
origin.  In  order  to  succeed  in  the  erection  of  this  monument,  it  is 
necessary  that  all  Protestants  display  a  spirit  large,  liberal,  and 
generous.  M.  Montet  concluded  with  an  eloquent  passage  in  which 
he  wished  the  Boston  Congress  all  the  success  which  so  noteworthy 
a  gathering  deserved. 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — We  are  particularly  gratified  to  welcome 
at  our  Congress  the  representatives  of  Scandinavian  nations. 

From  Denmark  has  come  to  us  Mr.  Theo.  Berg,  of  Copen- 
hagen, a  faithful  fellow-worker  for  pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty; 
from  Sweden,  Professor  O.  E.  Ltndberg  of  Gothenburg,  a  writer 


59° 

and  speaker  whose  strong,  brave  words  in  behalf  of  liberal  religion 
are  carried  far  and  wide  in  his  native  country.  To  them  we  unite  in 
our  introduction  Professor  T.  G.  Masaryk,  of  the  University  of 
Prague,  the  champion  of  human  rights,  the  defender  of  the  pro- 
scribed Jews,  the  leader  of  the  Bohemian  people  into  national  inde- 
pendence, higher  culture,  and  a  religion  of  character,  freedom,  and 
faith.  [Applause;  band;  Swedish,  Danish,  Norwegian,  and  Austrian 
national  colors  displayed.] 

Professor  Masaryk,  who  was  to  respond,  proved  to  be  absent. 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — Far  to  the  East,  among  the  wild  Car- 
pathians, in  the  picturesque  province  of  Transylvania,  dwell  the 
brave  and  talented  Szekler  race.  Here  and  in  other  parts  of  Hun- 
gary, for  more  than  three  hundred  years,  there  have  maintained 
themselves,  often  against  fearful  oppression,  a  body  of  churches 
Unitarian  in  faith,  composed  95  per  cent,  of  farmers  and  trades- 
people, simple-hearted,  laborious,  and  devout.  We  greet  with 
brotherly  affection  their  sole  representative  among  us,  Rev.  Nicolas 
Jozan,  pastor  of  a  flourishing  church  at  Budapest  and  a  bearer  of 
light  and  sweetness  wherever  he  goes.  His  presence  reawakens 
old-time  memories  of  the  visit  to  Boston  of  his  gifted  fellow  country- 
man, Louis  Kossuth,  whose  eloquent  appeals  for  political  and  re- 
ligious liberty  kindled  within  the  breasts  of  our  citizens  responsive 
sentiments  of  admiration  and  sympathy. 

The  hour  is  now  so  late  that  I  can  only  ask  Mr.  Jozan  to  bow 
his  acknowledgments.  [Great  applause;  band;  and  display  of  the 
emblem  of  Hungarian  Nationalists.] 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — The  peoples  and  religions  of  the  Orient, 
also,  are  represented  at  our  gathering,  and  warmly  welcomed  as  our 
brothers  in  the  spirit.  From  them  we  are  to  learn  anew  of  our  in- 
debtedness to  the  ancient  faiths  and  philosophies  of  the  East,  and 
how  in  its  latest  development  they  are  being  wedded  with  the  prac- 
tical wisdom  and  power  over  nature  of  our  twentieth-century  civili- 
zation. I  present  to  you  Professor  Gokura  Subba  Rau,  Mr.  B.M. 
Sehanavis,  Mr.  S.  L.  Josm,  Mr.  B  arakatullah,  of  the  Mohammedan 
faith, all  of  India;  Mr.  S.  C. K. Rutnam, of  Ceylon;  and,  finally, our 
delegates  from  the  Land  of  the  Rising  Sun,  Rev.  Saichiro  Kanda, 


59i 

of  Tokio,  and  a  number  of  his  friends  and  compatriots,  Sakustjke 
Momikura,  K.  Kanokogi,  M.  Kanda,  M.  Watanabe,  and  others 
whose  names  I  will  not  venture  upon. 

I  will  ask  Professor  Rutnam,  of  Ceylon,  to  respond  for  his  fellow- 
delegates  from  the  Orient.  [Applause;  band,  Japanese  national  air; 
and  flag.] 


PROFESSOR  S.   C.   K.   RUTNAM,  OF  CEYLON. 

I  have  been  told  to  be  very  brief,  and  so  I  must  desire  your  close 
attention  to  the  greetings  from  the  friends  of  India  and  Ceylon. 

If  there  is  one  thought  that  my  countrymen  would  wish  me  to 
convey  to  you  to-night,  it  is  this, — that,  while  passing  through  a  great 
crisis  in  the  history  of  India,  we  are  wondering  if  the  people  of 
the  West  can  be  just.  The  truth  about  India  is  indeed  a 
great  question;  but  what  is  truth?  One  of  your  leading  men  has 
said,  "Truth  is  the  matching  of  thought  to  reality,"  and  I  do  not 
profess,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  to  tell  you  something  of  the  truth  of 
India.  But  this  is  certain:  we  have  begun  to  believe  in  the  father- 
hood of  God,  and,  as  such,  we  realize  that  we  belong  to  the  same 
brotherhood.  If  there  is  one  force  to-day  that  is  helping  us  to  move 
forward  in  spite  of  forces  which  seem  to  be  very  powerful,  it  is  this 
recognition  that  the  Supreme  Father  is  on  our  side,  and  our  struggles 
for  liberty  and  freedom  have  seriously  begun.  Never  before  in  the 
history  of  India,  never  before  in  the  history  of  Ceylon,  have  the  peo- 
ple seriously  asked  this  question,  and  I  am  thankful  that,  when  I 
return  to  my  own  country,  I  shall  take  with  me  the  expression  of  this 
assembly  that  they  are  men  and  women  who  fully  sympathize  with 
us,  who  recognize  the  thought  of  the  common  family  of  the  human 
race.  To  my  mind,  to  those  who  are  actuated  by  larger  patriotism, 
there  is  no  thought  more  uplifting,  more  ennobling,  more  exhilarating 
than  this  thought  of  the  brotherhood  of  the  human  race.    [Applause.] 

The  struggles  of  this  country  for  liberty  which  began  in  Boston 
fully  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago,  I  fear,  are  beginning  to  be  re- 
peated in  India.  And,  if  there  is  any  country  to  which  we  could 
legitimately  and  rightly  look  for  sympathy,  it  is  to  Boston  and  to 
this  gathering  here.  We  pray  that  your  sympathy  may  be  with  us, 
that  your  hearty,  cordial  advice  may  be  given  to  us,  so  that  we,  too, 


592 

may  march  on  in  the  path  of  progress  and  liberty  which  this  country 
so  well  represents.    [Applause.] 

Rev.  C.  W.  Wendte. — There  are  other  countries  and  faiths  we 
should  like  to  have  heard  from  this  evening,  but  time  will  not  permit. 
We  can  only  greet  and  welcome  them  all  in  the  freedom  of  the  spirit 
and  the  bond  of  brotherhood. 

The  large  assembly  now  partook  of  refreshments,  and  engaged  in 
animated  conversation  or  listened  to  the  music  of  the  orchestra  until 
a  late  hour. 


593 


THE   BANQUET, 

The  banquet  tendered  the  Congress  delegates  from  foreign  coun- 
tries by  the  Unitarian  (laymen's)  Club  of  Boston  took  place  on 
Thursday  evening,  September  26,  in  the  Banquet  Room  of  the 
Hotel  Somerset,  and  was  an  affair  of  unusual  brilliancy  and  spirit. 

Tables  had  been  set  for  some  five  hundred  guests,  one  at  the  upper 
end  being  reserved  for  the  speakers.  The  beauty  of  the  room  itself, 
the  lustre  from  hundreds  of  electric  lights,  the  toilettes  of  the  ladies, 
the  music  from  the  orchestra,  the  hum  of  cheerful  conversation, 
the  enjoyment  of  the  dinner,  the  wise  and  witty  addresses,  and  the 
general  elation  over  the  success  of  the  Congress  which  had  just  con- 
cluded its  sessions  combined  to  make  it  a  happy  ending  to  the  stren- 
uous days  which  had  preceded.  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel  M.  Crothers, 
who  presided,  by  his  genial  and  humorous  introductions  added  much 
to  the  pleasure  of  the  occasion,  which  will  long  be  remembered  by 
all  who  participated.  The  speakers  were  H.  Bowring  Lawford, 
president  of  the  London  Laymen's  Club,  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond, 
of  New  Zealand,  Professor  O.  E.  Lindberg,  of  Sweden,  Frederick 
Maddison,M.P.,of  England,  Rev.  Abraham  Rihbany,  of  Toledo,  and 
Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  of  Chicago.  A  full  report  of  their  ad- 
dresses may  be  found  in  the  Christian  Register  of  Oct.  10,  1907. 
Lack  of  space  prevents  their  inclusion  in  this  volume.  It  was  much 
regretted  that  from  want  of  time  the  addresses  expected  from  Rev.  Dr. 
Frank  O.  Hall,  of  New  York,  Professor  F.  G.  Peabody,  D.D.,  of 
Harvard,  and  others,  remained  unspoken. 

A  feature  of  the  banquet  which  was  especially  noted  and  com- 
mended by  the  European  guests  was  the  entire  absence  of  wine  or 
other  alcoholic  beverages  at  the  tables. 

The  committee  of  the  Unitarian  Club  who  had  charge  of  the 
arrangements  were  Dr.  Walter  Channing,  Mr.  Charles  E.  Birtwell, 
secretary,  and  Dr.  Francis  H.  Brown,  treasurer  of  the  club. 


594 


EXCURSION  AND   NEIGHBORHOOD    MEETINGS. 


WEST  NEWTON  AND  CAMBRIDGE. 

One  of  the  most  enjoyable  and  profitable  features  of  the  Inter- 
national Congress  were  the  excursions  to  places  of  interest  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Boston  and  the  proceedings  which  took  place  at 
these  reunions.  These  excursions  were  carefully  planned,  and 
were  in  charge  of  Mr.  Percy  A.  Atherton,  of  Boston,  who  had  at- 
tended the  Congresses  at  Amsterdam  and  Geneva  as  a  delegate.  It 
is  to  his  able  and  devoted  service,  and  the  aid  rendered  him  by 
committees  and  volunteer  workers  in  each  locality  visited,  that  the 
successful  conduct  of  these  visits  to  New  England  shrines  is  to  be 
attributed.  The  committee  was  made  up  of  Percy  A.  Atherton, 
chairman,  Lyman  K.  Clark,  Prescott  Keyes,  Paul  S.  Phalen,  William 
S.  Kyle,  Edgar  H.  Nichols,  Walter  Winsor,  William  Brewster,  and 
Horace  Hildreth,  each  of  whom  took  charge  of  a  special  department 
of  the  work  or  acted  as  chairman  of  the  larger  local  committees. 
To  give  the  names  and  properly  divide  the  praise  among  the  hun- 
dreds of  men  and  women  who  labored  in  each  town — West  Newton, 
Cambridge,  Concord,  Plymouth,  Hingham,  Fairhaven,  etc. — for  the 
reception  and  comfort  of  our  guests  would  be  an  impossible  task. 
The  committee  can  only  return  to  them  as  a  whole  its  profound 
thanks  for  their  efficient  and  generous  services.  The  entire  success 
which  attended  their  endeavors  and  the  enjoyment  and  delight  of 
their  visitors  from  abroad  and  at  home  must  be  their  reward. 

The  excursions  were  inaugurated  by  a  visit  on  Sunday  afternoon, 
September  22,  to  the  beautiful,  newly  erected  Unitarian  church  in 
West  Newton.  Under  Mr.  Lyman  Clark's  direction  over  100 
foreign  delegates  were  taken  in  automobiles,  many  of  which  were 
kindly  loaned  by  their  owners  for  the  occasion,  through  Beacon 


595 

Street,  the  Parkway  to  Jamaica  Pond,  Brookline,  and  Wellesley, 
where  the  college  grounds  and  the  Hunnewell  Estate  were  visited 
en  route  to  the  West  Newton  church.  Here  a  warm  welcome  by 
pastor  and  people  and  a  social  cup  of  tea  awaited  the  party.  The 
return  was  made  by  Commonwealth  Avenue  through  the  Newtons, 
Brighton,  and  Brookline,  a  number  of  the  delegates  making  a  brief 
call  at  the  residence  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Congress,  Rev.  C.  W. 
Wendte. 

The  Congress  held  its  last  session  on  Thursday,  September  26, 
in  Cambridge,  by  invitation  of  the  Harvard  University  authorities. 
This  called  for  a  large  display  of  hospitalities,  which  were  cheerfully 
and  generously  extended.  Special  electrics  were  run  from  the 
subway  at  intervals  direct  to  Sanders  Theatre.  At  the  conclusion 
of  the  session,  under  the  leadership  of  Mr.  Edgar  H.  Nichols,  and 
with  Rev.  Dr.  Crothers's  hearty  co-operation,  the  members  of  the 
First  Parish  (Unitarian)  served  a  series  of  lunches  in  the  commodious 
Parish  House  to  all  American  delegates  who  wore  the  Congress 
badge,  several  hundred  in  number.  The  university  authorities 
entertained  some  200  of  the  foreign  and  invited  guests  at  the  Harvard 
Union.  The  latter  was  a  very  happy  occasion.  Brief  speeches  were 
made,  the  President  of  the  University  and  his  son,  President  of 
the  Congress,  were  cheered,  and  bowed  their  acknowledgments. 
Later  in  the  afternoon  various  parties  of  sight-seers,  directed  by 
students  and  other  guides,  were  taken  on  a  tour  of  inspection  of  the 
university  buildings  and  collections.  Some  visited  the  graves  of 
Channing,  Longfellow,  Phillips  Brooks,  and  other  heroes  of  the 
spirit,  in  the  adjacent  Mt.  Auburn  Cemetery.  The  Cambridge 
Day  concluded  with  a  largely  attended  social  reunion  and  tea  at  the 
home  of  the  President  of  the  Congress,  Rev.  S.  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  on 
Reservoir  Street. 


596 


THE  EXCURSION  TO   CONCORD. 

On  Monday  afternoon  the  foreign  guests  went  by  invitation  on  a 
special  train  to  Concord.  In  spite  of  the  heavy  rain-storm  which 
had  set  in,  quite  a  large  company  had  assembled  at  the  station. 
One  writes:  "The  persistent  rain  covered  the  car  windows  with  so 
much  moisture  that  little  could  be  seen  of  the  region  they  were 
passing  through.  Some  one  of  the  local  committee  announced  when 
Walden  Pond  came  into  view,  and  immediately  there  was  a  general 
rubbing  of  mist  off  the  windows,  to  get  a  watery  and  uncertain 
glimpse  as  the  train  sped  by.  It  was  trying  to  have  but  one 
chance  to  visit  Concord,  and  that  in  a  steady  rain,  but  every  one 
said,  'Better  so  than  never,'  and  good-naturedly  made  the  best  of 
it.  So,  too,  did  the  good  people  of  Concord,  who  came  with  their 
carriages,  open  or  covered,  to  show  their  historic  and  literary  land- 
marks. There  was  Miss  Emerson  herself,  with  an  open  vehicle, 
taking  her  quota  of  guests  the  rounds,  as  well  as  opening  to  all  the 
Emerson  home.  The  road  was  from  the  station  up  the  main 
street,  past  the  Thoreau  house,  thence  to  the  Minute-man  and  the 
cemetery,  where  each  group,  as  it  arrived,  alighted  and,  putting  up 
umbrellas,  walked  up  a  knoll  to  view  the  Sleepy  Hollow  graves. 
It  was  a  suggestive  sight  to  see  this  little  company,  gathered  from 
many  lands,  grouped  about  the  last  resting-places  of  America's 
most  noted  novelist,  her  hermit  sage,  while  a  turbaned  native  of 
India,  bending  forward  eagerly,  regardless  of  the  rain,  copied  the 
inscription  from  the  gravestone  of  her  famous  seer. 

"  Regaining  their  carriages,  the  delegates  were  carried  in  the  other 
direction  past  the  last  Alcott  home  and  Hawthorne's  'Wayside,' 
then  to  the  Emerson  home,  the  lower  floor  of  which  was  kindly 
opened  to  them. 

"The  next  stop  was  at  the  rebuilt  First  Parish  Meeting-house. 
In  its  ample  parlors  an  open  fire  gave  an  attractive  welcome,  while 
tea  and  cake,  served  at  a  number  of  small  tables,  broke  the  company 
into  groups  not  too  large  for  sociability.  After  a  pleasant  half-hour 
the  kindly  drivers  returned  the  party  to  the  station,  where,  with 
sunshine  within,  if  not  without,  and  packages  of  souvenir  postal 
cards,  they  set  their  faces  Bostonward." 


597 


EXCURSIONS  TO  PLYMOUTH,  HINGHAM, 
AND   FAIRHAVEN. 

The  excursions  of  Friday  and  Saturday,  September  27  and  28,  to 
Plymouth,  Hingham,  and  Fairhaven,  were  among  the  most  delight- 
ful features  of  the  Congress,  affording  opportunities  for  the  delegates 
from  abroad  to  meet  the  American  members  socially,  both  on  the 
train  and  during  the  visits  to  the  places  of  interest.  Several  hun- 
dred members  took  part  in  the  excursion  to  Plymouth,  but  the 
company  visiting  Fairhaven  was  necessarily  limited  to  about  125, 
the  limit  being  fixed  by  the  number  that  could  be  entertained  at 
lunch  in  the  Parish  House  of  the  Memorial  Church.  Both  trips 
were  of  great  interest  to  the  visitors  from  abroad,  that  of  Friday 
taking  them  to  the  point  which  of  all  others  seemed  most  interesting 
to  those  coming  from  Europe, — Plymouth  Rock,  the  symbol  of 
religious  liberty  in  America.  The  day's  trip  gave  them  the  oppor- 
tunity of  seeing  two  typical  New  England  villages  and  an  ancient 
church  which  embodied  the  best  taste  and  skill  of  the  old  New 
England  Congregational  parishes,  while  the  Fairhaven  journey 
showed  them  one  of  the  highest  realizations  of  art  and  architecture 
in  the  modern  American  church.  Here,  too,  they  examined  with 
much  interest  the  other  public  buildings,  and  gathered  new  ideas  of 
American  institutions  and  customs. 

The  railroad  and  other  arrangements  were  in  the  hands  of  the 
Committee  on  Excursions,  and  were  most  admirably  managed,  both 
trips  being  carried  out  with  scarcely  a  minute's  delay  in  any  partic- 
ular. 

On  the  morning  of  September  27,  at  Plymouth,  Hon.  W.  S.  Kyle, 
Mr.  William  Brewster,  Hon.  Arthur  Lord,  and  other  members  of 
the  First  Parish  Church  met  the  visitors  at  the  station.  Special 
cars  carried  them  to  the  First  Parish  Church,  where  the  exercises 
were  to  be  held.  The  visitors  read  with  much  interest  the  inscrip- 
tions on  this  church,  and  many  were  surprised  to  learn  that  the 
church  founded  by  the  Pilgrims  is  now  of  the  Unitarian  faith.  Rev. 
Samuel  A.  Eliot,  D.D.,  opened  the  exercises  in  the  First  Parish 


59« 

Church  by  reading  the  Psalm,  "We  have  heard  with  our  ears,  O 
God,  our  fathers  have  told  us,"  etc.,  after  which  the  audience  sang 
the  following: — 

ORIGINAL   HYMN. 

Tune,  "Duke  Street." 

BY  C.  W.  WENDTE. 

From  lands  afar,  with  eager  quest, 
We  gather,  at  the  soul's  behest, 
Where  once  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  trod, 
To  seek  the  city  of  our  God. 

Four-square  with  truth  that  city  lies, 
Its  shining  walls  toward  Heaven  arise, 
And  its  foundations,  strong  and  sure, 
In  righteousness  and  faith  endure. 

O  city,  dreamed  by  ancient  seer, 
Our  faithfulness  must  bring  thee  near; 
Our  toil  and  sorrow,  hope  and  prayer, 
Alone  can  lift  thy  walls  in  air. 

Yet  not  to  us,  to  Him  the  praise, 

Whose  strength  sustains  and  guides  our  ways, 

Till  all  the  earth  with  awe  shall  own 

The  Master-builder,  God  alone. 

President  S.  A.  Eliot. — A  word  of  greeting  will  be  spoken  to  you  by 
an  honored  member  of  this  parish,  the  president  of  the  Pilgrim 
Society,  the  Hon.  Arthur  Lord. 


HON.  ARTHUR  LORD. 

It  is  now  nearly  three  centuries  since  there  gathered  on  this  hill- 
side the  "Mayflower  "  company  of  English  men  and  women,  "hope 
in  each  heart  and  prayer  on  every  lip,"  and 

"  Here,  their  God  adoring, 
They  stood  in  open  air. 
When  breaking  day  they  greeted, 

And,  when  its  close  was  calm, 
The  leafless  woods  repeated 
The  music  of  their  psalm." 


599 

They  had  left  their  English  church  and  their  English  homes  for 
conscience'  sake;  but  laborious  years  in  an  alien  land  had  not 
weaned  them  from  loyalty  to  the  Crown  nor  alienated  their  affec- 
tions from  the  England  of  their  youth.  In  the  peaceful  city  of  Ley- 
den,  in  the  shadow  of  its  great  university,  they  had  found  civil  lib- 
erty and  religious  toleration,  but  they  longed  for  the  sight  of  the 
English  flag,  the  sound  of  the  English  tongue,  the  influence  of  Eng- 
lish institutions,  and  a  well-ordered  liberty  and  religious  freedom 
under  an  English  king.  To  the  New  World,  then,  their  thoughts 
turned;  of  its  unknown  shores  the  old  men  dream  dreams  and  the 
young  men  see  visions. 

The  town  which  they  founded,  the  church  which  they  planted 
in  the  wilderness,  extends  to-day  its  cordial  greeting  to  the  liberals 
of  the  present  time,  delegates  from  the  land  which  bore  them,  delegates 
from  the  land  which  welcomed  and  cherished  them,  delegates  also 
from  the  shores  of  still  more  distant  seas.  In  their  name,  and  espe- 
cially in  the  name  of  that  First  Church  whose  continuous  ministry 
and  unbroken  records  unite  the  present  with  the  past,  I  bid  you 
welcome,  and  thrice  welcome,  to  the  Rock  the  Pilgrim  feet  first 
trod,  to  the  hill  where  sleep  in  unmarked  graves  their  early  dead, 
to  the  streets  where  stood  their  rude  dwellings,  to  the  history,  the 
traditions,  and  the  memories  of  Plymouth  and  the  Pilgrims. 

For  a  moment  the  noises  of  the  busy  life  of  the  present  fade 
away,  and  from  out  the  silence  upon  the  attentive  ear  and  listening 
mind  there  fall  the  echoes  of  the  hymns  and  prayers  of  that  Pilgrim 
company  whose  heroic  souls,  inspired  by  an  indomitable  courage, 
a  lofty  hope,  and  a  triumphant  faith,  famine  and  pestilence,  danger 
and  death,  could  not  dismay. 

The  first  in  that  great  stream  of  English  immigration  which  marked 
the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  to  effect  a  permanent  set- 
tlement upon  New  England  shores,  they  differed  radically  not  only 
in  their  form  of  civil  government  from  that  company  of  English- 
men which  thirteen  years  before  had  sailed  between  the  Virginia 
capes,  and  whose  settlement  at  Jamestown  was  the  foundation  settle- 
ment of  the  United  States,  but  also  in  their  religious  polity  and 
spirit.  Calvinists  in  creed,  in  communion  with  the  French  and 
Dutch  Reformed  churches  of  their  day,  under  a  religious  leader 
terrible  to  the  Arminians,  in  organization   Congregationalist,  their 


6oo 

eyes  were  turned  to  the  new  light  yet  to  come  as  they  listened  for 
the  new  truths  yet  to  break  forth  out  of  His  holy  word. 

Upon  the  stately  gate  of  the  great  World's  Exposition  at  Chicago 
was  inscribed  the  impressive  line, — "Toleration  in  Religion  the 
Best  Fruit  of  the  Last  Four  Centuries."  It  was  America's  verdict 
of  the  value  of  the  gift  to  humanity  which  those  centuries  brought. 
From  yonder  painted  window  gleams  the  message  of  to-day,  that 
that  best  gift  of  all  the  centuries  was  the  "fruit  of  Pilgrim  sowing." 

There  is  a  singular  appropriateness  in  this  great  gathering  of 
liberals  of  all  lands,  pausing  for  a  day  in  the  work  of  a  great  and 
important  congress  to  pay  their  tribute  to  the  memory  of  those  exiles 
here,  the  Liberals  of  their  age,  who  bewailed,  as  Robinson  said,  the 
state  and  condition  of  the  Lutherans  who  could  not  be  drawn  beyond 
what  Luther  saw,  of  the  Calvinists  stuck  where  Calvin  left  them,  and 
who  recognized  and  believed  that  even  to  those  famous  shining  lights 
God  had  not  yet  revealed  His  whole  will. 

You  have  visited  and  will  visit  the  homes  where  lived,  the  scenes 
where  labored,  the  graves  where  rest,  the  great  Liberal  preachers, 
poets,  and  teachers  of  the  later  generations.  I  do  not  underestimate 
their  labors  or  their  services,  but  we  may  well  believe  that  the  first 
foundation  or  plantation  of  the  religious  freedom  which  they  taught 
is  of  more  noble  dignity  and  merit  than  all  that  followeth.  Here  they 
studied  union,  and  not  division,  and  found  in  the  simple  covenant 
inscribed  on  these  walls  an  enduring  bond  of  fellowship,  which  em- 
braced all  those  who,  differing  in  non-essentials,  could  find  within 
its  liberal  fold  an  ample  liberty. 

This  cardinal  principle  of  toleration  was  their  legacy  to  New 
England,  and  when  for  a  time  in  other  colonies  religious  leaders 
taught,  as  did  Mather,  that  "Antichrist  hath  not  a  more  probable 
way  to  advance  his  Kingdom  of  Darkness  than  by  a  toleration  of 
all  religions,"  and  civil  governors  held  with  Dudley  it  to  be  the  duty 
of  men  of  God  in  courts  and  churches 

»  "to  watch 

O'er  such  as  do  a  toleration  hatch, 
Lest  that  ill  egg  bring  forth  a  cockatrice 
To  poison  all  with  heresee  and  vice," 

the  candle  lighted  here  still  gleamed  through  the  darkness  and  gloom; 


6oi 

and  on  the  broad  foundations  of  which  they  laid  the  corner-stone 
the  later  generations  have  built  their  temples  consecrated  to  a  worship 
which  permits  the  broadest  liberty  and  concedes  the  widest  freedom 
of  thought. 

The  story  of  their  lives  and  labors,  of  their  persecutions  in  England, 
of  their  freedom  in  the  peaceful  city  of  Leyden,  of  the  stormy  voyage 
of  the  "Mayflower,"  adventurer  of  a  forlorn  hope,  of  the  scattered 
remnant  gathered  on  the  wind-swept  shores  beneath  a  wintry  sky 
around  the  unmarked  graves,  of  the  signing  of  the  Compact,  the  Magna 
Chartaof  their  civil  liberties,  of  the  departure  of  the  "Mayflower," 
leaving  behind  all  the  exiles,  the  living  and  the  dead,  the  story  of  the 
humane  treaty  with  the  Indian,  which  secured  by  gift  or  purchase, 
and  not  by  conquest,  these  fields  they  and  their  descendants  were  to 
till,  and  of  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  later  days,  need  not  be 
repeated  here.  It  speaks  from  the  pictured  canvas,  it  lives  in  ora- 
tion and  song  and  printed  page,  it  is  engraved  deep  in  the  hearts 
of  a  grateful  people.  Here  free  popular  government  found  its  first 
advocates  and  its  first  example.  Here  communism  received  its 
earliest  and  fairest  test,  and  its  pernicious  doctrines  their  conclusive 
answer,  as  the  experience  of  those  "godly  and  sober  men,"  in  the 
words  of  Bradford,  "well  evinced  the  vanity  of  that  conceit  of  Plato's 
and  other  ancients,  applauded  by  some  of  later  times." 

Here  the  right,  the  use,  the  service,  of  individual  property,  found 
its  earliest  champions,  whose  strong  and  clear  convictions,  based 
on  their  hard-earned  experience,  are  embodied  in  our  written  con- 
stitution, and  conserve  the  security  and  progress  of  a  well-ordered 
commo  nwealth. 

But  to-day  we  remember  and  cherish,  as  the  foremost  of  all  their 
great  achievements,  as  the  bright,  consummate  flower  of  the  Pil- 
grims' spirit  and  purpose  and  labors,  that  great  principle  of  religious 
toleration,  their  dream  your  hope,  their  aspiration  your  endeavor, 
their  teachings  your  belief,  their  faith  the  supreme  reality  whose 
dawn  you  dimly  see,  "of  many  races  one  people,  of  many  creeds  one 
faith,  of  many  bended  knees  one  family  of  God." 

The  President. — In  behalf  of  the  members  of  the  Congress, 
I  thank  you  for  your  cordial  greeting  and  for  the  hospitality  of  the 
First  Parish  of  Plymouth.    We  make  grateful  acknowledgment  of 


602 

the  courtesy  which  permits  us  to  pay  tribute  at  this  dearest  shrine 
of  all  the  New  World. 

I  know  that  to  many  minds  the  early  history  of  this  America 
of  ours  seems  dry  and  unromantic;  there  is  no  mist  of  distance  to 
soften  the  harsh  outline;  there  is  no  mirage  of  tradition  to  lift  the 
events  and  characters  into  picturesque  beauty.  The  transplanting 
of  a  people  breaks  the  succession  of  history.  The  land  seems  lack- 
ing in  the  elements  that  appeal  to  the  imagination.  Instead  of  the 
glitter  of  chivalry,  for  instance,  here  we  have  nothing  but  the  home- 
spun of  these  Puritan  peasants.  Instead  of  cathedrals  and  castles 
on  which  time  has  laid  the  hand  of  benediction  we  have  but  such  a 
rude  meeting-house  as  you  will  see  this  afternoon  at  Hingham.  It 
seems  a  story  plebeian  and  prosaic.  The  Puritan  and  Pilgrim 
played  on  a  stage  which  has  no  background.  He  allures  us  by  no 
pride  of  birth  or  pomp  of  display,  but  just  by  clean-grained  human 
usefulness  and  "brave  old  wisdom  of  sincerity." 

How  then  is  it — how  is  it  that  out  of  that  hard  soil,  out  of  the 
sterile  rocks  of  the  New  England  thought  and  conscience,  there 
have  sprung  flowers  of  inspiration  whose  beauty  and  fragrance  the 
world  celebrates?  What  is  it  in  this  Pilgrim  heritage  outwardly 
so  bare  and  so  cold  that  makes  it  intrinsically  so  poetic  ?  There  is 
no  poetry  in  the  mere  struggle  of  our  forefathers  here  for  existence 
or  in  the  mean  poverty  that  marked  the  outward  life  of  early  New 
England.  Our  Pilgrim  fathers  were  often  pinched  for  food;  they 
suffered  in  a  bitter  climate;  they  lived  in  isolation.  We  think  lightly 
of  these  things  because  we  cannot  help  imagining  that  they  knew 
that  they  were  founding  a  mighty  nation;  but  that  knowledge  was 
denied  them.  "Generations  of  them  sank  into  nameless  graves 
without  any  vision  of  the  day  when  their  descendants  should  rise 
up  and  call  them  blessed."  There  is  but  little  poetry  or  inspiration 
in  the  measure  of  their  outward  success.  Judged  by  their  own 
desires,  these  Pilgrims  failed:  they  attempted  the  impossible,  and 
they  would  hardly  recognize  or  approve  the  harvest  that  has  sprung 
from  the  seed  of  their  sowing. 

Why,  then,  do  we  celebrate  them?  Wisely  has  it  been  said 
that  "  it  is  not  merely  because  in  danger  or  in  failure  they  were 
stout-hearted.  Many  a  freebooter,  many  a  soldier  of  fortune,  has 
been  that.     It  was  because  they  were  stout-hearted  for  an  ideal." 


603 

Whenever  and  wherever  men  and  women  devote  themselves  not  to 
material,  but  to  ideal  ends,  there  the  world's  heroes  are  born,  and 
born  to  be  remembered  and  to  become  the  inspiration  of  noble 
daring.  The  worth  of  nations  is  weighed  in  scales  more  delicate 
than  the  balance  of  trade.  "On  the  map,"  said  Lowell,  "you 
can  cover  Athens  with  a  pin-point  and  Judea  with  a  finger-tip, 
yet  in  those  insignificant  places  the  impulses  were  given  which  have 
not  ceased  to  direct  civilization." 

The  glory  of  a  State  is  not  in  the  number  of  bushels  of  wheat  it 
raises  or  the  tons  of  coal  it  mines  or  the  miles  of  railroad  track  it 
lays,  but  in  the  type  of  character  that  it  produces,  in  the  standard 
of  intelligence  it  upholds,  in  the  best  personality  it  develops.  It 
is  when  a  nation  catches  sight  of  an  ideal  of  character,  when  it 
arouses  itself  and  adapts  its  institutions  to  the  development  of  free 
manhood  in  its  citizens,  that  it  begins  to  write  history,  and  the  world 
begins  to  read  it  and  to  draw  inspiration  from  it.  Believe  me,  when 
every  man  among  us,  beyond  his  home  affections,  beyond  his 
e very-day  concerns,  feels  the  pressure  of  those  invisible  ideals  that 
allured  our  forefathers  hither,  then  is  he  their  worthy  descendant 
and  the  true  son  of  the  mother  of  a  mighty  race. 

My  friends,  this  meeting-house  stands  nearly  upon  the  site  of 
the  original  meeting-house  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers.  Behind  us  rises 
the  Burial  Hill,  before  us  is  the  sea.  Between  stretches  the  street 
on  either  side  of  which  were  lined  the  humble  dwellings  of  the  orig- 
inal planters  of  this  town.  That  street  is  named  Leyden  Street, 
for  the  town  which  in  Holland  cherished  these  Pilgrims.  It  is  pe- 
culiarly appropriate,  therefore,  that  at  this  meeting  we  should  have 
a  word  from  the  delegate  from  Holland.  He  will  tell  us  not  only 
of  these  connections  and  associations  which  we  cherish,  but  of  that 
measure  of  religious  freedom  which  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  found  and 
left  in  Holland.     Professor  Groenewegen,  of  Leyden.    [Applause.] 

Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen. — If  there  is  any  place  in  America 
where  American  people  can  feel  their  relation  to  old  Holland,  it  must 
be  Plymouth,  the  spot  where  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  landed  when  they 
started  from  my  fatherland.  And,  if  there  is  any  place  in  Holland 
where  the  American  people  feel  their  relation  to  your  country,  it 


604 

must  be  dear  old  Leyden.  Just  next  the  building  where  I  nearly 
every  day  have  to  give  my  professorial  lectures  is  the  beauti- 
ful old  place  where  lived  and  died  John  Robinson.  And  right  op- 
posite there  is  a  fine  old  church  with  a  beautiful  bronze  memorial 
tablet  for  John  Robinson,  who  is  buried  there.  And  it  was  at  that 
very  time,  my  friends,  when  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  started  from  Hol- 
land, that  Holland,  too,  had  its  martyrs  for  the  sake  of  religion  and 
freedom.     These  were  the  Remonstrants. 

(Professor  Groenewegen  here  read  a  paper  on  the  Remonstrants, 
which  is  given  elsewhere.) 

The  President. — As  you  go  out  of  the  church,  you  will  read  the 
tablet  in  the  vestibule  whereon  is  written  the  covenant  of  this  ancient 
parish, — a  covenant  which  has  been  in  force  since  the  Fathers  landed 
on  this  strand  and  under  which  this  church  still  lives.  Too  many 
of  us  imagine  that  the  founders  of  New  England  were  given  only  to  a 
rigid  and  ruthless  bigotry.  The  fact  is  that  this  is  not  an  excep- 
tional case.  The  First  Church  in  Boston,  the  First  Church  in 
Salem,  and  many  another  were  established  with  a  covenant  so  broad, 
so  generous,  so  what  we  call  nowadays  liberal,  as  to  make  it  per- 
fectly possible  for  the  present  Unitarian  Churches  to  maintain  those 
original  covenants.  No  one  can  put  his  finger  upon  the  spot  or 
upon  the  time  when  this  church  or  many  another  of  the  ancient 
Puritan  churches  of  Massachusetts  became  Unitarian.  It  was  a 
natural,  an  inevitable  evolution. 

The  hymn,  "Gone  are  those  great  and  good,"  was  sung  to  the 
tune  "America,"  after  which  the  benediction  was  pronounced  by 
the  President. 

After  a  half-hour  spent  on  Burial  Hill,  cars  were  taken  for  the 
Pilgrim  Monument,  with  the  heroic  statue  of  "Faith"  surmount- 
ing it.  Returning  by  electrics  to  Town  Square,  the  guests  were 
escorted  to  the  Universalist  church,  where  lunch  was  served.  The 
blessing  was  asked  by  Rev.  Algernon  S.  Crapsey,  of  Rochester,  N.Y. 

After  the  luncheon  a  procession  was  formed  to  visit  Plymouth 
Rock.  The  canopy  enclosing  it  was  open  for  the  occasion,  so  that 
the  visitors  rested  their  feet  upon  the  rock  trodden  by  the  Pil- 


605 

grims.  Led  by  the  English  delegation,  the  company  joined  in 
singing  the  doxology,  after  which  they  proceeded  to  Pilgrim  Hall, 
where  the  many  relics  of  the  Pilgrims  were  viewed  with  interest. 


EXERCISES  AT  HINGHAM. 

Soon  after  3  p.m.  the  train  was  taken  for  Hingham.  Here  the 
bells  of  the  town  meeting-houses  rang  a  cheerful  welcome  to  the 
visitors.  On  arrival  the  company  were  met  by  members  of  the 
local  churches  and  escorted  to  the  First  Parish  Meeting-house, 
where  the  following  words  of  welcome  were  spoken  by  Mr.  Francis 
H.  Lincoln,  treasurer  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association: — 

Friends,  we  welcome  you  all  to  Hingham.  From  the  home  of 
the  Pilgrim  we  welcome  you  to  the  home  of  the  Puritan.  For 
within  a  few  moments,  when  you  crossed  the  line  of  which  the  south- 
ern boundary  of  Hingham  is  a  part,  you  passed  from  the  original 
limits  of  the  Plymouth  Colony  into  those  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay 
Colony.  As  a  descendant  of  the  Puritans  who  came  from  Nor- 
folk in  Old  England,  and  settled  in  this  town,  as  a  member  of  this 
parish  in  the  seven  generations  of  those  who  have  worshipped 
within  its  fold  from  the  beginning,  as  a  citizen  of  this  town  and  a 
native  of  this  town,  I  bid  you  all  a  hearty  welcome.  It  is  fitting 
that  a  congress  of  religious  liberals  should  come  to  this  place, — a 
place  where  independence  of  thought  and  action  have  always  been 
one  of  the  chief  characteristics.  The  first  minister  of  this  town,  the 
Rev.  Peter  Hobart,  in  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  century,  was 
prohibited  from  preaching  a  sermon  in  Boston  by  the  magistrates  at 
the  marriage  of  one  of  his  flock,  because,  as  they  alleged,  he  was  a 
bold  man  and  would  speak  his  mind.  Ebenezer  Gay,  who  served 
this  parish  sixty-nine  years  as  its  minister,  in  the  middle  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  dared  to  preach  more  liberal  doctrines  than  they 
were  accustomed  to  in  the  churches  of  that  day,  and  by  his  influence 
created  such  an  impression  through  this  section  that  you  find  to-day 
the  old  First  Parishes  along  our  coast  from  here  to  Plymouth  and 
beyond  are  Unitarian.  To  those  who  come  from  old  countries,  we 
seem  new:  to  those  who  come  from  other  parts  of  our  own  country 
we  seem  old.     Yet  old  and  new  are  but  relative  expressions  of  the 


6o6 

passage  of  time,  a  dot  on  eternity.  And,  old  or  new,  we  welcome 
you  all  as  members  of  one  great  family  of  the  children  of  God.  [Ap- 
plause.] 

"From  hand  to  hand  the  greeting  flows, 
From  eye  to  eye  the  signals  run, 
From  heart  to  heart  the  bright  hope  flows, 
The  seekers  of  the  light  are  one." 

Rev.  Louis  C.  Cornish,  minister  of  the  church,  next  uttered  a 
welcome  on  behalf  of  the  parish. 

You  have  been  welcomed  to  the  town.  It  is  my  privilege,  as 
minister  of  the  parish,  in  the  ten  minutes  at  our  disposal,  to  tell  you 
very  briefly  its  history,  and  to  welcome  you  most  cordially  to  our 
meeting-house,  the  oldest  place  of  public  worship  now  in  use  in  the 
United  States. 

The  meeting-house  tells  its  own  story,  the  simple  history  of  village 
life,  of  quiet  growth,  of  two  hundred  and  twenty-five  years  of  con- 
tinuous public  worship.  To  our  fellow-countrymen  it  is  venerable 
with  the  memories  of  all  of  our  national  and  most  of  our  colonial  life. 
It  has  been  the  silent  witness  to  almost  the  whole  of  our  American 
history.  To  our  foreign  friends  it  must  look  very  modern.  To  them 
it  is  the  building  of  recent  days.  It  brings  no  memory  of  mediaeval 
times,  no  associations  of  ancient  grandeur,  of  kings  and  prelates,  of 
churchly  pageants,  memories  which  enrich  many  of  the  liberal 
churches  in  older  lands.  Yet  to  our  friends  from  over  the  sea  and 
to  our  own  countrymen  alike  it  bespeaks  a  sturdy  independence.  It 
is  the  visible  sign  of  a  democracy  in  things  religious  in  the  midst  of 
a  political  democracy.  And  it  reminds  us  of  that  larger  fellowship 
of  free  churches  wherein  it  holds  an  honored  place.  It  is  this  story 
of  independence  in  religion  that  I  am  to  tell  you  in  the  few  moments 
given  us  this  afternoon. 

Our  New  England  settlements,  as  we  all  remember,  were  the 
expression  of  the  Puritan  movement.  In  England  it  caused  the 
Civil  Wars  and  established  the  Commonwealth.  In  America  it 
brought  to  Plymouth  and  Salem  and  Boston,  Scituate,  and  Barn- 
stable and  Hingham,  settlements  of  independent  people.  Certain 
independent  folk  in  Hingham,  England,  selling  their  possessions  at 


607 

great  sacrifice,  came  over  the  ocean  in  1633  to  the  shores  of  our  little 
harbor.  Not  far  from  Boston,  and  on  the  trail  that  then  led  through 
the  forest  to  Plymouth,  the  site  was  convenient,  and  their  numbers 
increased.  In  1635  they  formed  themselves  into  a  parish  and  town, 
which  they  called  Hingham  after  their  English  home.  They  settled 
Peter  Hobart,  a  fellow-townsman  from  Hingham,  England,  as  their 
minister,  a  young  graduate  of  Magdalene  College,  Cambridge.  They 
built  a  wooden  meeting-house  near  the  site  of  this  building,  which 
they  protected  with  a  palisade  against  possible  Indian  attack.  Here 
for  nearly  fifty  years  the  town  gathered  not  only  for  public  worship, 
but  for  every  possible  concern.  The  parish  and  town,  or  town  and 
parish,  were  one  and  the  same.  The  town  was  responsible  for  the 
minister's  salary.  Births  and  deaths  and  marriages  mingle  in  the 
early  records  indiscriminately  with  the  transfers  of  land  and  the 
usual  affairs  of  a  community.     Town  and  parish  were  identical. 

This  was  in  Peter  Hobart's  ministry.  In  1678  Mr.  Norton  became 
minister,  and  in  1681  this  meeting-house  was  built.  There  was  a 
long  controversy  over  its  location,  the  governor  of  the  colony  finally 
interfering  to  settle  the  dispute.  Upon  the  tablet  before  you  are  the 
names  of  the  parish  ministers.  Mr.  Hobart  is  the  only  one  who  did 
not  officiate  in  this  building.  You  will  notice  that  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  parish  in  1635  down  to  1886,  a  period  of  two  hundred  and 
fifty  years,  there  were  but  six  ministers.  The  present  minister  is 
the  tenth  to  hold  the  office. 

The  Calvinism  of  the  early  settlers  never  was  formulated  into 
binding  articles  of  faith.  From  the  first  this  parish  was  an  inde- 
pendent congregation,  and  the  present  parish  and  its  sister  churches 
so  have  remained.  The  independence  of  the  early  days  merged 
imperceptibly  into  the  Unitarian  movement.  There  is  no  trace  upon 
our  parish  records  of  the  Unitarian-Trinitarian  controversy.  All 
our  Hingham  parishes  gave  their  allegiance  naturally  to  the  Uni- 
tarian denomination. 

Until  well  into  the  middle  of  the  century  just  past  the  three  Hing- 
ham Unitarian  Congregational  churches  remained  the  only  churches 
in  the  community.  That  undisturbed  dominion  of  our  independent 
churches  here  in  this  township,  which  existed  unbroken  well  into  the 
middle  of  the  century  just  past,  has  been  ever  since  in  a  process 
of  subdivision,  due  to  many   reasons,  social,  racial,  and  economic. 


6o8 

The  Universalists  built  their  church  in  1824, — a  rebuke  to  the  gloom 
which  then  overhung  our  faith.  New-comers  have  settled  in  the 
town,  and  have  brought  with  them  their  own  way  of  worshipping  the 
Father  of  all.  The  churches  of  Baptists,  Methodists,  Trinitarian 
Congregationalists,  Episcopalians,  and  Roman  Catholics,  have  now 
their  honored  place  in  the  life  of  the  community.  But  our  liberal 
churches  find  themselves  in  ever-nearer  fellowship  with  these  newer 
churches.  We  believe  in  all  modesty  that  we  have  helped  create 
the  harmony  that  reigns  among  us.  There  is  no  church  in  the  town- 
ship that  does  not  give  generous  recognition  to  the  labors  of  its 
neighbor  and  wish  it  God-speed  in  its  work  and  worship.  In  the 
midst  of  these  shifting  modern  conditions  our  liberal  churches  hold 
fast  to  their  ancient  independence,  not  unprofitable  stewards,  we 
hope,  of  our  great  heritage.  We  look  forward  to  that  larger  faith 
for  all  mankind,  that  truer  definition,  that  broader  spirit,  of  which 
this  Council  is  at  once  the  sign  and  prophecy. 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  exercises  the  delegates  from  abroad  were 
escorted  to  the  ancient  residence,  now  the  home  of  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Cornish,  where  tea  was  served.  The  American  visitors  were  at 
the  same  time  entertained  by  the  ladies  of  the  parish  in  the  Parish 
House.  Opportunity  was  afforded  all  to  visit  the  New  North 
Church,  which  was  also  open  for  the  inspection  of  visitors.  At 
5.45  p.m.  the  train  was  taken  for  Boston. 


6og 


EXCURSION  TO  FAIRHAVEN. 

The  excursion  to  Fairhaven  left  the  South  Station  by  special  train  at 
nine  o'clock  Saturday  morning,  September  28,  and  reached  Fairhaven 
about  10.30  a.m.  The  visitors  were  received  at  the  Fairhaven  Sta- 
tion by  Mr.  Walter  P.  Winsor,  representing  the  Excursion  Committee 
and  the  members  of  the  Local  Committee,  and  proceeded  at  once  to 
the  church,  the  chimes  of  which  were  playing.  The  Local  Committee 
of  Arrangements  consisted  of  the  following  gentlemen:  Edward  G. 
Tallman,  J.  C.  Tripp,  Herman  H.  Hathaway,  Levi  M.  Snow,  John 
H.  Stetson,  A.  B.  Kimball,  Josiah  Pettee,  Jr.,  and  Harry  Bisbee. 
The  committee  was  assisted  by  a  large  number  of  the  ladies  of  the 
church  and  by  many  of  the  young  people,  who  acted  as  ushers  and  as 
guides. 

Services  were  held  in  the  church,  at  which  musical  selections  were 
rendered  by  the  choir,  consisting  of  Mrs.  Edna  A.  Purdy,  Miss 
Mabel  Melville,  H.  Lambert  Murphy,  and  Willard  Bowdoin;  Martin 
B.  Paull,  organist. 

The  opening  devotional  service  was  conducted  by  the  minister  of 
the  church,  Rev.  Frank  A.  Phalen,  after  which  the  congregation 
joined  in  singing  Whittier's  hymn,  "  Oh,  sometimes  gleams  upon 
our  sight." 

Prayer  was  offered  by  Rev.  W.  B.  Geohegan,  of  New  Bedford. 

Rev.  F.  A.  Phalen  gave  the  following  address  of  welcome: — 

The  honor  and  pleasure  has  devolved  upon  me  as  the  minister 
of  this  church,  representing  its  people,  to  give  you  a  word  of  wel- 
come on  this  to  us  and,  we  trust,  to  you,  auspicious  and  inspir- 
ing occasion.  There  are  many  things  in  my  heart  that  I  would 
like  to  say  to  you,  but  they  have  already  been  well  said  in  Boston  and 
in  other  places  where  you  have  been  welcomed.  This  town  of  ours, 
to  which  we  welcome  you  to-day,  is  one  of  the  oldest  towns  in  the 
country.  We  have  the  honor  of  tracing  its  foundation  to  one  of  the 
men  who  came  over  in  the  "Mayflower,"  one  of  the  original  Pilgrims, 
John  Cook  by  name,  who  settled  in  this  vicinity  in  1645,  and  who 


6io 

died  here  about  1680.  If  you  have  time  to-day,  among  other  interest- 
ing objects  which  you  may  see  is  a  boulder  marking  the  grave  of 
that  Pilgrim.  So  we  have  a  certain  pride  in  our  origin,  and  in  the 
character  of  people  this  town  has  produced  in  the  past  and  still  pro- 
duces to-day. 

We  are  proud  of  our  town,  we  are  proud  and  grateful  for  the  build- 
ings, religious,  civic,  educational,  which  dot  the  town,  and  which  are 
the  gems  to  which  we  invite  your  attention.  But  we  are  especially 
proud  of  the  beautiful  temple  in  which  we  are  gathered  at  this  mo- 
ment. From  many  lands,  with  many  and  various  ideas,  and  by  dif- 
ferent pathways,  worshipping  the  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  this 
church,  as  you  may  have  observed  as  you  entered  this  south  portal,  is 
a  cathedral  in  the  truest  sense,  for  we  have  on  each  side  of  that 
large  south  portal,  cut  in  stone,  a  symbol  of  the  apostle  Saint  Peter 
and  also  of  Saint  Paul.  So  we  stand  for  the  broadest  catholicity 
and  sympathy  of  spirit;  for  all  that  was  beautiful  and  rich  in  the 
symbolism,  in  the  architecture,  in  the  music,  of  the  old  Catholic 
Church,  and  for  all  that  is  true  and  beautiful  and  good  in  these 
modern  days.  And  I  like  to  think  that  those  two  statues  are  sym- 
bolical of  our  catholicity.  Then,  as  you  pass  out  through  the  cor- 
ridor, you  will  see  upon  the  wall  a  statement  of  the  faith  for  which 
this  church  stands,  and  I  will  repeat  it.  It  is  familiar  to  those  of  you 
who  belong  to  our  America,  but  may  not  be  so  familiar  to  those  who 
come  from  abroad: — 

"We  believe  in  the  fatherhood  of  God; 
The  brotherhood  of  man; 
The  leadership  of  Jesus; 
Salvation  by  character; 
The  progress  of  mankind,  onward  and  upward  forever." 

I  said  we  were  proud  and  grateful,  those  of  us  who  minister  in  this 
pulpit  and  those  who  worship  in  the  pews,  that  we  have  this  atmos- 
phere of  inspiration  and  beauty  from  week  to  week  entering  solemnly 
into  our  lives.  And  I  think  we  have  this  pride  and  this  gratefulness 
in  no  selfish  spirit,  for  we  desire  to  share  it  with  all  who  come  to 
us,  from  whatever  land  or  from  whatever  part  of  the  world.  But  we 
axe  also  proud  of  the  spirit  of  affection,  of  gratitude,  of  interest  in 
the  town,  in  the  man,  the  benefactor,  the  friend,  the  far-reaching, 


6n 

thoughtful  personality,  looking  to  the  future,  who,  out  of  his  affection 
and  gratitude  to  his  mother,  built  this  miracle  of  beauty  out  of  stone. 
And  to-day,  as  we  welcome  you  here  and  as  we  together  share  this 
service,  we  want  you  to  remember,  as  you  go  back  to  your  homes,  that 
there  is  this  spirit  in  the  American  Unitarian  laymen  to-day  in  this 
country  to  do  what  has  been  done  here,  not  only  for  this  parish,  but 
for  all,  and  for  the  great  unborn  future. 

President  S.  A.  Eliot. — We  thank  you  for  your  welcome. 
We  are  grateful  that  the  hospitality  of  this  parish  permits  us  to 
gather  in  this  beautiful  house  of  God  and  to  visit  together  this 
characteristic  New  England  village.  It  is,  however,  a  New  England 
town  which  illustrates  for  us  how  the  somewhat  austere  simplicity  of 
our  Puritan  origins  may  blossom  into  beauty.  The  liberality  and 
filial  devotion  of  one  of  the  sons  of  the  town  has  made  it  beautiful. 
You  will  visit  the  school  where  the  educational  life  of  the  town  receives 
that  hallowing  touch.  Behind  us  is  a  fine  and  well-equipped  library 
that  serves  the  intellectual  life  of  the  community.  The  civic  life  is 
nobly  housed  in  a  handsome  town  house.  The  social  life  is  upbuilt 
here  by  a  pleasant  and  attractive  inn  and  by  rooms  for  the  fraternal 
orders.  And  the  spiritual  life  is  deepened  by  the  atmosphere  and 
influence  of  this  church. 

It  does  us  good  to  meet  here,  because  I  think  too  many  of  us  are  in 
danger  of  letting  our  work  grow  sometimes  too  mechanical  and 
commonplace  and  forgetting  the  deeper  and  higher  inspirations  that 
might  be  ours.  We  must  not,  friends,  rank  the  virtue  of  common 
sense  above  the  virtue  of  imagination.  Of  course,  you  and  I  are 
honest  folk,  and  we  do  not  propose  to  equivocate.  Fact  is  fact,  and 
poetry  is  poetry.  But  I  submit  that  facts  need  sometimes  to  be  en- 
shrined in  symbolism.  We  need  to  see  the  dramatic  side  of  this  high 
adventure  of  ours.  We  need  to  have  the  cares  and  perplexities  and 
monotonies  of  our  every-day  duties  lifted  into  a  realm  where  they 
can  be  irradiated  with  beauty. 

Comparatively  few  Religious  Liberals  need  to  be  exhorted  to  just 
calculation  and  clear  reasoning  and  upright  doing;  but  do  not  many 
of  us  need  freer  imagination  and  more  of  generous  impulse,  more  of 
reverence  and  of  devotion?  Christianity  is  sometimes  taken  to  be 
primarily  a  matter  of  belief,  of  our  intellectual  assent  to  somebody's 


6l2 

authoritative  thinking,  or,  again,  we  are  apt  to  say  that  Christianity 
is  primarily  a  life,  that  it  consists  in  our  private  virtue  and  our 
public-spirited  devotion.  But  somehow  those  definitions  have 
always  seemed  to  me  inadequate.  Christianity  certainly  needs 
and  contains  certain  deep  convictions:  without  them  it  would  be 
invertebrate.  It  certainly  includes  good  works:  without  them 
it  would  be  but  a  shallow  sentimentalism.  But,  when  you  and  I 
analyze  what  we  call  our  religion  down  to  the  bottom,  do  we  not 
discover  that  fundamentally  it  is  an  emotion,  and  our  faith  and 
our  works  are  just  the  flowers  that  spring  from  that  root  ?  Chris- 
tianity, to  my  mind,  is  partly  an  affair  of  the  head,  of  clear, 
thorough  thinking;  partly  an  affair  of  the  hands,  of  strong,  helpful 
doing;  but  down  at  the  bottom,  for  most  of  us,  it  is  an  affair  of 
the  heart,  of  deep,  tender  feeling.  And  so  I  love  to  come  into 
the  atmosphere  of  a  church  like  this,  where  reverence  is  natural, 
where  cheerfulness  is  prevalent,  where  all  the  appointments  for 
worship  are  as  perfect  as  good  taste  can  make  them. 

I  have  sometimes  thought  that  the  best  parts  of  religion  are  the 
parts  that  express  themselves  naturally  in  music.  If  you  have  ever 
thought  of  it,  our  controversial  arguments  are  not  singable,  whereas 
our  trust  and  reverence  and  aspiration  turn  naturally  to  music 
for  adequate  expression.  It  is  hard  luck  for  a  choir  if  it  has  to 
sing  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  or  for  a  composer  if  he  has  to  set 
the  Athanasian  Creed  to  music.  These  things  are  not  singable. 
But  the  Psalms  and  the  sayings  of  Jesus  are  essentially  lyrical,  and 
are  probably  best  understood  by  us  when  they  are  musically  inter- 
preted. I  have  always  liked  a  story  of  Cardinal  Newman.  He 
was  once,  you  remember,  challenged  by  a  vigorous  sceptic  to  pub- 
licly debate  the  reality  of  religion,  and  Newman  answered  that  the 
challenger  might  have  all  the  time  allotted  to  the  argument,  and  to 
prove  the  reality  of  religion  he  would  only  ask  leave  to  play  an  air 
of  Schubert's  on  his  violin.  It  will  not  do  to  press  the  point  too  far, 
but  we  need  to  reassure  ourselves  that  religion  is  a  matter  of  the 
heart  rather  than  the  head.  We  must  beware  lest  we  try  to  sub- 
stitute light  for  heat  in  these  things.  The  noblest  intellect  is  that 
which  is  shot  through  with  passion.  Reason  has  got  to  be  lifted  on 
the  shoulders  of  some  deep  and  true  emotion  before  its  light  can 
enlighten  a  weary  and  distressed  humanity. 


613 

I  am  not  a  bit  afraid  that  we  shall  get  any  too  great  detachment 
from  earth  if  we  trust  ourselves  more  to  the  wings  of  the  spirit. 
We  are  all  earth-born,  and  we  look  down  a  good  deal  more  natu- 
rally than  we  look  up.  Our  common  sense  is  in  no  danger  in  a  Liberal 
church.  What  we  rather  have  to  fear  is  the  loss  of  spiritual  passion, 
the  congealing  of  ardor,  the  loss  of  poetic  fancy.  We  have  to  fear 
that  we  shall  let  the  charm  of  lovely  wonder  die  out  of  our  minds 
and  hearts,  and  finally  imagine  that  we  can  fathom  the  unfathom- 
able. Let  us  just  be  rational  enough  to  acknowledge  that  religion 
has  not  only  got  to  speak  clearly  to  our  minds  and  commend  itself 
to  our  sense  of  moral  obligation,  it  has  also  got  to  give  us  something 
for  the  heart  to  love  and  for  the  soul  to  worship. 

I  rejoice,  then,  that  we  come  here  into  the  atmosphere  and  influ- 
ence of  a  house  where  there  may  be  given  to  us,  and  to  those  who 
for  generations  after  shall  worship  here,  the  spiritual  insight  that 
knows  that  the  things  that  are  seen  are  temporal  and  that  the  things 
that  are  not  seen  are  eternal. 

I  am  going  to  ask  a  few  of  our  friends  who  have  endeared  them- 
selves to  us  during  the  meetings  of  the  week  to  say  at  this  closing 
meeting  a  few  words  of  greeting  and  farewell.  First,  I  am  going 
to  turn  to  Wales:  we  have  not  heard  as  yet  from  that  principality. 
May  I  present  to  you  the  Rev.  J.  Tyssul  Davis,  a  Welshman  by 
birth,  now  of  Chatham,  England? 


REV.  J.  TYSSUL  DAVIS,  OF  CHATHAM,  ENGLAND. 

Amongst  the  closing  impressions  which  we  are  to  gather  into  our 
nest  of  pleasant  thoughts,  we  are  singularly  fortunate  in  having 
the  vision  of  this  beautiful  temple  to  carry  home  with  us  and  to 
inspire  us  to  do  something  in  our  own  country  to  further  the  union 
of  art  with  religious  expression.  An  Englishman  was  standing 
before  the  great  Taj  Mahal  in  India,  and,  as  he  saw  that  beautiful 
structure  in  all  its  splendor  in  the  moonlight,  he  said  to  himself, 
"  How  beautiful  must  she  have  been  who  has  inspired  so  beautiful 
a  memorial!"  And  perhaps  in  the  future  pilgrims  will  come  to 
this  church,  and  will  say  also,  when  they  remember  that  it  is  a 


614 

memorial  to  a  woman,   "How  beautiful  must  she  have  been  to 
kindle  such  filial  devotion  in  her  son!" 

It  has  been  a  revelation  to  me,  and  I  am  sure  to  many  of  you,  to 
find  such  beautiful  churches  in  America,  the  home  of  Puritanism. 
We  have  a  few  beautiful  churches  in  England  and  Wales,  but  many 
have  already  expressed  the  thought  that  we  have  nothing  equal  in 
magnificence  to  this.  There  we  still  suffer  from  the  Protestant 
reaction  against  Catholicism,  and  we  still  remember  that,  with  all 
its  offices,  Protestantism  helped  us  to  ignore  the  fact  that  art  was 
the  handmaid  of  religion.  Protestantism  raised  into  predominance 
over  all  the  other  senses  the  sense  of  the  hearing  of  the  Word.  And 
now  we  are  beginning  to  realize  that  the  Word  became  flesh  in  order 
that  men  should  behold  His  glory,  full  of  grace  and  of  truth.  I 
come  from  a  little  county  in  England  where  very  little  has  been  done 
in  the  way  of  showing  the  grace  and  truth  of  the  Word  made  flesh. 
There  in  our  bare  and  rude  temples  among  the  hills  of  Wales  we 
have  one  form  of  artistic  expression, — we  have  the  service  of  song, 
and  I  have  never  elsewhere  heard  anything  to  equal  that.  But  we 
still  very  largely  need  the  other  side  of  the  artistic  expression,  that 
which  shows  to  the  eye  the  grace  and  beauty  of  the  Word  made 
flesh.  What  a  pity  it  is  that  in  that  mistranslation  of  one  of  the 
appellations  of  our  Master  He  should  be  called  merely  "the  Good 
Shepherd"!  You  remember  that  He  is  "the  Shepherd  beautiful." 
And  we  are  kindled  and  inspired  by  that  to  believe  that  His  ser- 
vice should  also  be,  and  the  temple  where  we  adore  His  name  should 
also  be,  beautiful.  The  comparison  has  often  been  made  of  our  own 
age  with  the  mediaeval  ages  and  with  the  great  period  of  Greek  won- 
ders, and  we  are  told  that,  whereas  in  the  old  days  the  great  Greeks 
were  content  to  dwell  themselves  in  rude  wooden  huts  as  long  as  they 
had  the  Parthenon  to  look  out  upon,  we  to-day  demand  that  we 
shall  dwell  ourselves  in  the  Parthenon,  and  we  are  content  that  the 
wooden  huts  shall  be  assembled  together  and  made  into  the  house 
of  God.  We  are  beginning  to  be  alive  to  that  reproach.  We  are  be- 
ginning to  feel  that  we  may  emulate  those  ancient  Greeks  to  some 
extent, — emulate  the  spirit  of  those  ages  which  we  call  dark  because 
we  are  so  much  in  the  dark  about  them,  that  spirit  which  raised 
those  great  miracles  of  architectural  beauty,  the  cathedrals  of  Eu- 
rope, and  that  we,  too,  in  our  age  should  do  something  to  beautify 


6i5 

worship  and  beautify  the  temples  where  we  gather  together  to  hear 
the  word  of  the  Lord. 

I  am  very  grateful  to  our  friends  at  Fairhaven  for  inviting  us 
out  here  and  letting  us  have  a  picture,  a  vision,  of  this  beautiful 
temple.  We  shall  go  back  and  tell  our  friends  these  things,  and  I 
hope  we  shall  do  something  in  our  little  way  to  enable  them  to  em- 
ulate our  friends  in  America.  Then,  indeed,  we  may  carry  with  us 
the  word  of  Browning,  and,  looking  on  our  simpler  and  poorer  houses, 
we  may  say, — 

"  I  bid  these  walls  be  consecrate, 
This  wretched  cell  to  be 
A  shrine;  for  here  I  speak, — for  here 
God  speaks  to  men  through  me. ' ' 

[Applause.] 

The  President. — Now  we  want  a  brief  word — if  Irish  elo- 
quence can  cease — from  our  friend,  Mr.  John  A.  Kelley,  of  Belfast. 


REV.  JOHN  A.  KELLEY. 

I  rise  with  great  pleasure  to  show  myself  to  you  as  an  Irishman.  I 
have  very  great  pleasure  in  obeying  your  command  given  me  this 
morning  after  we  came  into  the  church,  that  I  should  say  a  few  words 
to  you,  because  it  seems  to  me  that  in  all  the  great  and  inspiring 
meetings  that  we  have  had  Ireland  has  not  been  spoken  for,  al- 
though represented  in  person  by  my  good  friend  and  fellow-pres- 
byter, the  Rev.  Thomas  Dunkerley,  of  Cumber,  by  Rev.  Alex- 
ander Ashworth  and  Mrs.  Ashworth,  of  Belfast,  and  by  myself.  But 
the  representatives  who  were  called  upon  were  called  upon  as  Brit- 
ish representatives.  Now  let  me  inform  you  who  do  not  know  that 
Britain  does  not  include  Ireland.  [Laughter.]  Ireland  likes  to 
speak  for  itself.  ["Hear,  hear!"]  It  may  be  presumption,  but 
somehow  or  other  it  is  the  sort  of  thing  that  the  Almighty  has  planted 
in  us,  and  that  which  the  Almighty  has  planted  in  us  must  have  its 
expression.  And  here  you  give  us  the  opportunity  to-day,  which  op- 
portunity I  embrace  at  once  and  for  many  reasons.  In  the  first  place 
I  am  glad  to  have  an  opportunity  of  telling  you  how  we,  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  Association  of  Irish  Non-subscribing  Presbyterians 


6i6 

and  Other  Free  Christians  in  the  north  of  Ireland,  feel  at  the  recep- 
tion that  you  have  given  to  us.  We  are  thoroughly  satisfied, — in 
fact,  Mr.  President,  we  are  overwhelmed  at  the  kindness  that  we 
have  received  since  we  came  to  this  country.    [Applause.] 

But  there  is  a  second  reason,  and  that  is  that  the  opportunity 
that  I  now  enjoy  has  been  given  to  me  in  this  beautiful  church,  which, 
as  I  look  upon  it,  seems  to  me  to  be  fittingly  represented  by  the 
words  of  the  poet,  "A  thing  of  beauty  is  a  joy  forever." 

We  have  enjoyed  our  visit  to  your  great  country,  and  when  I  go 
around  your  various  great  cities  and  find  that  my  fellow-countrymen 
are  there  in  great  numbers,  exercising  their  great  influence,  I  re- 
joice that  it  was  the  good  providence  of  God  that  a  day  of  evil,  as 
it  seemed  to  us,  came  upon  our  little  island,  and  that  millions  of  our 
countrymen  came  out  into  this  great  land  where  they  have  had 
room  to  grow  and  to  prosper.  On  their  behalf  I  would  speak  this 
day,  and  I  feel  very  deeply  that  that  which  we  find  around  us  so 
congenial,  so  spiritual,  so  uplifting,  is  in  some  sense — and  I  say  it 
without  bragging — due  to  that  little  island  of  32,000  square  miles 
and  a  population  less  than  our  great  London.  In  the  dark  ages  of 
Christianity,  when  the  light  of  truth  and  of  spiritual  growth  seemed 
to  have  gone  out,  it  was  in  Ireland  that  it  was  kept  safe,  and  the 
apostles  and  confessors  were  sent  out  from  my  little  island  all  over 
England  and  into  Europe,  and  the  light  was  kindled  once  more. 
I  asked  myself  yesterday,  What  would  have  been  the  fate  of  Plym- 
outh and  of  New  England,  had  Ireland  not  existed  under  God's 
providence  in  those  Middle  Ages  ? 

I  am  glad  to  be  here.  I  thank  you,  brethren  and  sisters  of  this 
part  of  God's  kingdom,  for  all  you  have  done  for  us,  for  all  you  have 
done  for  true  spiritual  religion,  and  now  I  just  say  farewell. 

"Farewell,  a  word  that  has  been  and  must  be; 
A  sound  that  bids  us  linger — yet  farewell." 

[Applause.] 

The  President. — Even  in  this  beautiful  house  of  worship  we  must 
be  humbled  in  the  presence  of  one  who  comes  from  the  land  of  im- 
mortal beauty.  You  will  want  to  have  a  parting  word  from  our 
friend,  Rev.  Mr.  Andre",  of  Florence. 


617 


REV.    L.    E.    TONY   ANDRE,    OF    FLORENCE,    ITALY. 

Let  me  limit  myself  to  few  words.  In  English  I  must  be  very 
short;  but  without  many  words,  with  all  my  heart,  I  thank  our 
American  friends. 

We  have  enjoyed  during  all  this  week  the  most  generous  hos- 
pitality, and  we  shall  remember  it  all  our  life.  You  have  given  us 
the  opportunity  of  meeting  here  friends  from  all  parts  of  the  world, 
and  of  exchanging  with  you  and  with  them  in  perfect  communion  of 
spirit  helpful  religious  impressions. 

We  have  admired  your  strong  organization  and  the  power  of 
free  religious  thought  in  a  free  country.  What  a  comfort  this  is 
for  those  who  feel  lonely,  as  I  do  in  Italy! 

In  Italy  liberal  Protestantism  has  not  many  adherents,  and  the 
few  we  have  are  not  in  favor.  But  souls  and  hearts  can  meet  across 
the  seas,  and,  when  alone  in  my  far-away  country,  I  shall  remember 
the  Boston  Congress,  and  it  will  strengthen  me. 

I  thank  the  President  of  the  committee,  Dr.  Eliot;  the  Secretary, 
Mr.  Wendte;  and  all  the  members  of  the  committee;  the  ladies  and 
the  ministers  of  Boston  and  other  cities  where  we  have  been  so 
heartily  received.  Not  to  forget  anybody,  I  thank  all  those  who  have 
in  any  way  contributed  to  the  magnificent  success  of  these  meet- 
ings. And  to  all  friends  I  say  good-bye  until  the  next  Congress. 
[Applause.] 

The  President. — While  Mr.  Kelley  was  speaking,  I  looked  about 
for  a  Scottish  representative.  I  found  an  English  one.  May  we 
have  a  word  from  Mr.  Pope,  of  London  ?    [Applause.] 


REMARKS   OF   REV.    W.   W.    C.   POPE,    OF   LONDON. 

In  recent  travels  out  in  the  Western  States  I  overheard  two 
American  ladies  talking  in  the  train,  and  one  was  advising  the  other 
as  to  the  places  of  interest  to  be  visited.  The  speaker  said:  "What- 
ever you  do,  be  sure  you  go  to  Victoria  in  British  Columbia,  for  that 
place  is  finished,  that  place  is  perfect,  restful  and  quiet.  It  is  just 
the  place  that  all  we  people  are  looking  for."  As  to  this  church,  it 
is  perfect,  finished.    I  have  been  looking  about  for  ideas  to  take  home 


6i8 

with  me  about  church  building  which  I  will  have  the  audacity  to 
offer  to  an  architect.  I  am  afraid  I  shall  not  take  away  the  ideas 
that  are  embodied  here,  but  the  impression  on  my  mind  that  it  is 
perfect. 

Some  months  ago,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Council  of  the  British  and 
Foreign  Unitarian  Association  in  London,  I  was  asked  to  speak  to  a 
resolution  having  reference  to  our  coming  to  America.  I  ventured  to 
say  then  that,  if  the  whole  of  our  English  ministers  could  be  picked 
up  and  sent  to  America,  it  would  be  the  very  best  investment  that  the 
British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association  had  ever  made.  In  all 
my  going  out  West, — and  I  have  been  as  far  as  San  Francisco, — I 
have  dropped  off  on  every  possible  occasion,  whenever  I  could  find 
there  was  a  Unitarian  congregation  or  any  other  congregation  of 
like  mind, — I  have  dropped  off  dozens  of  times  and  stayed  over,  in 
order  that  I  might  have  the  great  privilege  of  calling  on  the  minister 
and  being  introduced  to  any  of  his  friends,  and  seeing  their  building, 
and,  whenever  I  could  possibly  do  so,  I  have  attended  their  service. 
Two  or  three  times  I  have  taken  some  humble  part  in  it.  Wherever 
I  have  been,  you  have  good  commodious  buildings,  and  the  men  I  have 
seen  are  whole-souled  men  who  preach  their  message.  You  have 
good  congregations.  I  have  had  the  pleasure  of  being  introduced  to 
several.  But  there  is  one  thing  I  would  like  to  offer  as  a  suggestion. 
I  wish,  Mr.  President,  somebody  would  put  it  into  your  heart  to 
appoint  a  small  committee  on  this  subject,  which  then  could  be  dupli- 
cated in  London,  a  small  committee  of  laymen, — there  is  no  need  of 
putting  ministers  on  a  committee  like  this, — laymen  who  will  see 
that  ministers  on  this  side  and  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic  get  an 
opportunity  to  exchange  for  three  to  six  months  every  year.  I  cannot 
conceive  anything  that  would  do  our  cause  and  our  churches  and 
our  ministers  in  England  more  good  than  a  visit  to  America  such 
as  this.  It  has  been  inspiriting  from  beginning  to  end.  I  am 
going  back  twenty  years  younger,  all  due,  Mr.  President,  to  your 
energy  and  to  the  extreme  kindness,  the  unbounded,  lavish  kind- 
ness that  we  have  received  at  the  hands  of  our  friends  in  America. 
I  thank  you.    [Applause.] 

The  President. — Our  last  speaker  will  be  our  constant  friend  and 
inspirer,  Professor  Jean  ReVille.    [Applause.] 


619 


REMARKS   OF   PROFESSOR   JEAN   REVILLE,    OF   PARIS. 

Mr.  President,  you  have  bestowed  upon  me  the  honor  of  saying 
some  words  in  the  name  of  the  non-English-speaking  delegates. 
But  you  asked  me  at  the  same  time  if  I  could  not  say  some  words  in 
English,  and  so,  as  I  am  fairly  obedient  to  the  authority  of  the  Presi- 
dent, I  cannot  do  otherwise  than  to  speak  in  English.  And  now  I 
must  beg  for  your  indulgence. 

I  have  been  at  all  the  Congresses  of  the  International  Council. 
I  am  proud  to  have  been  one  of  the  founders  of  this  Council.  The 
idea  was  born  here  in  the  United  States  amongst  the  Unitarians  of 
America,  and  the  first  meeting,  the  first  Council,  was  elaborated  by 
the  English  Unitarians  in  London.  I  was  pleased  to  have  been  called 
to  take  part  in  this  first  meeting  in  London.  But,  when  it  was 
finished,  I  was  somewhat  anxious,  and  I  said  to  myself,  "  That  is  a 
very  good  thing,  but  it  will  be  impossible  to  repeat  such  a  meeting  in 
another  place  and  to  do  as  well  as  it  has  been  done  in  London." 
Two  years  later  we  came  to  Amsterdam,  and  I  was  still  anxious. 
But  after  some  days  all  my  anxiety  had  vanished  away.  The  meet- 
ings in  Amsterdam  were  as  interesting  and  as  spirited  as  those  in 
London.  It  was  of  another  kind,  there  were  other  surroundings, 
but  the  spirit  was  the  same. 

Two  years  afterwards  we  went  to  Geneva,  and  it  also  was  another 
kind  of  meeting,  but  we  had  the  same  satisfaction.  And  now  we 
are  here  in  New  England,  on  the  other  side  of  the  ocean,  and  I 
cannot  express  sufficiently  all  that  we  have  experienced  in  these 
few  days,  and  how  thankful  we  are  to  all  those  who  have  prepared 
for  us  these  interesting  meetings,  these  reunions  where  we  have  been 
so  much  instructed  and  so  much  inspired,  and  which  have  made 
our  time  here  not  only  helpful  for  our  spirits,  but  also  agreeable 
for  our  eyes  and  hearts. 

I  speak,  sir,  in  the  name  of  the  non-English-speaking  delegates  who 
are  here, — if  all  those  who  would  have  liked  to  come  were  here,  this 
church  would  be  crowded,  but  the  Atlantic  Ocean  is  large  and  we 
are  not  so  accustomed  to  go  across  it  as  you  are  in  America.  We  are 
not  accustomed  to  come  to  America  as  you  are  accustomed  to  come 
to  Europe.    So,  if  all  those  who  wished  to  be  here  were  here,  we  would 


620 

be  very  numerous.  And  when  I  go  back  and  tell  what  we  have  seen 
and  done  here,  and  what  we  have  experienced,  I  am  sure  that  many 
more  still  will  regret  that  they  could  not  come.  And  I  thank  not  only 
the  committee  who  organized  the  meetings  in  Boston,  our  dear 
President,  our  dear  Secretary,  Mr.  Wendte,  who  has  worked  with  so 
much  zeal,  and  all  those  who  took  part  in  these  organizations:  I 
thank  also — and  it  is  a  duty  for  me,  because  they  have  not  so  promi- 
nent a  place — those  ladies  and  gentlemen  who  in  Concord  and  Plym- 
outh and  Hingham,  and  now  here,  have  received  us  with  so  much 
cordiality  and  given  us  opportunity  to  see  so  much  of  this  beautiful 
country  of  New  England,  and  to  see  not  only  the  large  cities,  but  to 
see  the  country,  the  country  life,  to  see  these  beautiful  houses  with 
pretty  gardens,  to  see  this  green  country,  these  beautiful  hills, 
and  this  sea  which  is  surrounded  by  all  kinds  of  summer  resorts. 
All  this  is  really  interesting  and  charming  for  us.  And  now  we  under- 
stand much  better  your  American  life.  It  is  not  the  life  of  the  busy 
streets  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia:  it  is  also  the  life  of  family 
homes  in  these  pleasant  resorts  of  New  England.    [Applause.] 

And  now,  artistically,  you  have  kept  for  last  what  is  the  most 
beautiful,  this  church, — this  church  where  we  find  all  the  poetry  of 
our  own  cathedrals  of  the  Middle  Ages,  this  church  where  the  whole 
past  seems  to  revive  in  a  new  manifestation  of  beauty  and  spirituality. 
We  are  here,  as  it  was  said,  in  a  Catholic  church,  in  a  church 
which  reproduces  the  beauty  of  the  Catholic  Christian  inspiration 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  But  who  are  those  who  meet  in  this  church  ? 
They  are  Liberals  of  all  countries,  men  who  are  not  at  all  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  spirit.  Now,  I  think,  we  can  see  here  the  promise 
of  a  new  catholicity,  a  future  church  which  will  be  catholic  by  its 
universality  and  which  will  be  free  and  modern  by  its  inspiration. 
We  are  here,  delegates  of  nearly  all  countries  of  the  world,  and 
we  are  united  by  the  same  spirit  of  faith  and  of  liberty,  and  I  say  that 
we  manifest  here  our  catholicity,  our  spiritual  catholicity,  the  catho- 
licity of  a  free  faith,  which  is  the  same  in  all  countries,  the  same  in  all 
times,  the  expressions  of  which  are  alike.  The  real  Christian  free 
faith  is  the  same  in  all  times.  We  must  accustom  ourselves  to  com- 
municate with  all  those  who  have  this  free  spirit  and  this  free  faith 
in  all  countries  and  in  all  languages.  We  must  accustom  ourselves 
to  appreciate  this  faith  in  times  past,  as  it  was  here  when  you  built 


621 

a  church  reproducing  the  most  beautiful,  the  most  magnificent  aspect 
of  the  faith  of  the  Middle  Ages.  We  must  be  able  to  recognize  what 
is  the  value  of  a  free  faith  in  all  ages.  Now  let  us  make  a  pledge 
that,  when  we  all  go  home,  we  shall  all  in  our  different  countries  work 
for  this  larger  catholicity  of  the  future,  in  which  all  shall  be  one  in  the 
same  spirit  of  faith  and  of  liberty.      [Applause.] 

After  an  anthem  by  the  choir  and  the  hymn  by  the  congregation, 
"  Nearer,  my  God,  to  Thee,"  the  benediction  was  pronounced  by 
Rev.  Dr.  Eliot. 

At  the  close  of  the  services,  luncheon  was  served  in  the  Parish 
House.  The  invocation  was  pronounced  by  the  Rev.  Alexander 
Webster,  of  Aberdeen,  Scotland. 

After  the  luncheon  the  delegates  were  taken  in  groups  by  the  young 
men  and  women  of  the  parish,  acting  as  guides,  to  visit  the  library, 
the  town  hall,  and  the  Fairhaven  High  School,  after  which  a  trolley 
trip  was  taken  through  the  town,  returning  to  the  station  in  time  to 
take  the  return  train  for  Boston. 


622 


MINISTERIAL   UNION   MEETING. 

Monday,  September  30. 

The  monthly  meeting  of  the  Ministerial  Union  in  Channing  Hall 
held  on  Monday,  September  30,  was  an  occasion  of  unusual  inter- 
est because  of  the  presence  of  a  large  number  of  delegates  to  the 
International  meetings,  and  the  reception  of  a  special  committee 
and  an  address  from  the  Ministerial  Fellowship  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland.  President  Rev.  Seth  C.  Beach,  D.D.,  of  the  Min- 
isterial Union,  presided.  Rev.  Harry  Lutz  was  secretary  of  the 
meeting.  The  Rev.  Charles  Roper,  of  London,  being  introduced 
as  the  president  of  the  British  society,  made  extended  and  fra- 
ternal remarks  introductory  to  the  following  address  and  greeting: — 

ADDRESS   AND    GREETING. 

The  members  of  the  Ministerial  Fellowship  (of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland)  send  sincere  and  brotherly  greetings  to  their  ministerial 
brethren  of  the  Unitarian  Churches  of  the  United  States  and  Can- 
ada on  the  occasion  of  the  International  Congress  at  Boston,  Sep- 
tember, 1907. 

We  recognize  the  interest  and  importance  of  this  Fourth  Meeting 
organized  by  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Lib- 
eral Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers.  A  number  of  our  fellow- 
members  are  crossing  the  Atlantic,  personally  to  grip  your  hands  and 
to  feel  the  thrill  and  inspiration  of  your  strenuous  life,  while  those 
who  are  left  behind  will  be  with  you  in  spirit  as  fraternal  coworkers 
in  the  same  field  of  labor. 

We  gratefully  acknowledge  our  indebtedness  to  the  leaders  of 
thought  among  you  for  the  freshness  and  vigor  of  their  presentations 
of  religious  truth.  So  strong  and  so  many  are  the  ties  that  bind  us 
together  that,  notwithstanding  the  stretch  of  ocean  between,  we 
feel  we  are  indeed  One  Household  of  Faith,  with  a  common 
gospel  and  a  common  literature.  Your  prophets  are  our  prophets, 
and  we  rejoice  to  think  that  our  prophets  are  also  yours. 


623 

We  want  you  to  feel  that  you  have  our  strong  and  hearty  sympathy 
in  the  noble  work  in  which  you  and  your  churches  are  engaged. 
In  many  ways  your  greater  achievements  inspire  and  encourage  us. 
We  proudly  feel  that  our  sympathy  with  you  is  reciprocated,  and 
that  we  together  recognize  that  we  are  serving  in  the  same  holy 
cause,  searching  for  the  same  truth  in  the  same  fearless  way,  and 
looking  up  to  the  same  God  for  light  and  strength  and  guidance  in 
our  common  endeavors. 

The  Ministerial  Fellowship  is  an  elective  body,  which  was  founded 
in  1899,  and  now  numbers  152  members,  every  year  adding  consid- 
erably to  its  roll.  By  their  subscriptions  its  members  are  insured 
for  benefit  between  pastorates, — a  system  which  we  have  found  most 
serviceable  in  many  cases  and  which  we  cordially  commend  to  your 
consideration.  You  may  perhaps  profit  from  our  experience  in 
this  direction,  as  we  in  our  Settlements  Bureau  and  projected 
Supply  Bureau  are  trying  to  learn  from  yours.  We  are  convinced 
that  in  the  close  co-operation  of  brother  ministers  much  good 
may  be  done  for  themselves  and  for  the  churches  which  they  re- 
present. 

Brethren,  all  hail!  The  contingent  that  invade  your  shores  come 
in  the  glad  spirit  of  peace  and  brotherly  love.  We  know  how  heart- 
ily you  will  welcome  them  as  our  representatives. 

We  earnestly  pray  that  in  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  we  may  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  work  for  the  realization  of  universal  peace 
and  acknowledged  brotherhood  the  wide  world  over,  until  men 
everywhere  have  beaten  their  swords  into  ploughshares  and  their 
spears  into  pruning-hooks.  God  speed  the  time  when  men's  energies 
are  wholly  devoted  to  discovering  his  newer  and  wider  truth,  and 
bringing  nearer  that  glorious  kingdom  of  God,  for  which  so  many 
generations  of  faithful  men  and  women  have  labored  with  unflagging 
zeal  and  undaunted  hope. 

We  are,  in  all  sincerity  and  on  behalf  of  our  whole  fellowship, 

Yours  fraternally, 

Charles  Roper,  President. 

Dendy  Agate,  Treasurer. 

J.  Crowther  Hirst,  Settlements  Secretary. 

Christopher  J.  Street,  Secretary  of  ike  Fellowship. 


624 

Rev.  Frederick  Summers,  C.  J.  Street,  and  others  made  addresses. 
Rev.  V.  D.  Davis,  B.A.,  of  London,  editor  of  the  Inquirer,  gave  a 
delightful  address,  without  notes,  in  which  he  pleaded  for  a  pro- 
founder  religiousness  as  the  fountain  and  source  of  all  ministerial 
activity  and  effectiveness.  His  words  were  not  taken  down  at  the 
time,  but  found  their  way  into  the  hearts  of  his  listeners,  whose  en- 
tire attention  showed  how  universal  and  deep  was  their  response  to 
his  appeal. 


625 


THE    CONGREGATIONAL    MINISTERS'   MEETING. 

Among  the  courtesies  extended  the  foreign  delegates  to  the  Con- 
gress, their  welcome  by  the  Congregational  Ministers'  Meeting  at 
the  Congregational  House  will  always  be  cherished.  On  three 
successive  Monday  mornings  this  association  of  clergymen  invited 
and  listened  to  addresses  by  Professors  G.  Bonet-Maury  and  Jean 
Re"ville  of  Paris,  Rev.  Dr.  John  Hunter  of  Glasgow,  Rev.  Miss  Ger- 
trude von  Petzold,  Rev.  William  G.  Tarrant  and  C.  J.  Street  of 
England,  and  others. 

The  discussions  which  followed  the  addresses,  while  disclosing 
differences  of  opinion,  were  marked  by  the  spirit  of  Christian  cour- 
tesy and  liberality. 


THE  TWENTIETH   CENTURY  CLUB. 

By  invitation,  on  September  28,  Hon.  F.  Maddison,  M.P.,  of  Eng- 
land, Rev.  W.  C.  Bowie  of  London,  Rev.  F.  C.  Fleischer  of 
Holland,  Miss  Mary  E.  Richmond  of  New  Zealand,  Rev.  W.  G. 
Tarrant  of  London,  S.  C.  K.  Rutnam  of  Ceylon,  delegates  to  the 
International  Congress,  addressed  the  Twentieth  Century  Club  of 
Boston  at  their  monthly  luncheon,  and  received  a  warm  welcome. 


626 


THE  AFTER-MEETINGS  OF  THE  INTERNATIONAL 
CONGRESS. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  the  late  Congress  was  the 
series  of  meetings  which  were  addressed  by  foreign  delegates  after 
the  Boston  session. 

The  Rev.  John  Hunter,  D.D.,  Rev.  V.  D.  Davis,  and  Professor 
E.  Montet  attended  the  Michigan  State  Conference  of  Unitarians, 
and  made  addresses.  Professor  Montet  also  spoke  at  the  State 
University,  and  Dr.  Hunter  lectured  before  the  same  institution. 
The  little  party  proceeded  to  Chicago,  where  a  series  of  meetings 
had  been  organized.  We  quote  from  an  editorial  by  Rev.  Jenkin 
Lloyd  Jones,  the  one-time  secretary  of  the  Chicago  Parliament  of 
Religions,  in  his  paper,  Unity : — 

"The  postscript  to  the  great  Boston  meeting  held  in  Chicago  was 
altogether  a  delightful  affair  to  all  parties  concerned.  Three  dele- 
gates from  over  the  water  were  escorted  to  Chicago  by  Rev.  L.  G. 
Wilson,  secretary  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association,  but  he 
dropped  them  soon  after  his  arrival,  and  went  on  his  way  mission- 
arying.  The  entertainment  and,  still  more,  the  utilizing  of  these 
men  was  intrusted  by  the  international  secretary,  Mr.  Wendte,  to 
Mr.  Backus,  secretary  of  the  Western  Unitarian  Conference,  Mr. 
Case,  pastor  of  the  St.  Paul  Universalist  Church,  and  Mr.  Osborne, 
secretary  of  the  Congress  of  Religion.  The  responsibility  of  execut- 
ing the  program  was  left  largely  to  Mr.  Osborne. 

"The  delegates  arrived  Friday  afternoon.  On  Saturday  three 
automobiles,  tendered  by  friends  of  the  Lincoln  Centre,  carried  a 
party  of  twelve  sight-seeing.  At  the  University  of  Chicago,  Dean 
Shailer  Mathews  and  Professor  Gerald  Birney  Smith,  of  the  Divin- 
ity School,  received  the  delegates  and  showed  them  around,  after 
which  the  party  was  joined  by  half  a  dozen  or  more  members  of  the 
faculty,  among  which  were  Doctors  Henderson,  Small,  Foster,  Vin- 


627 

cent,  Burton,  and  others,  in  a  sumptuous  luncheon.  At  the  close 
of  the  luncheon  Dean  Mathews,  in  the  name  of  the  president,  ex- 
tended to  the  foreign  delegates  the  welcome  and  courtesies  of  the 
university.  On  Sunday  morning  Dr.  John  Hunter,  of  Glasgow, 
preached  to  a  large  and  delighted  audience  at  the  Lincoln  Centre. 
Professor  Montet,  dean  of  the  Protestant  Theological  School  of  the 
University  of  Geneva  (Switzerland),  preached  in  Dr.  White's  pulpit, 
the  People's  Liberal  Church,  in  Englewood,  and  Rev.  V.  D.  Davis, 
editor  of  the  London  Inquirer,  preached  at  Unity  Church  on  the 
North  Side  in  Mr.  Hawley's  pulpit.  In  the  evening  there  was  a  real 
fellowship  meeting  held  at  the  Lincoln  Centre,  where  a  large  audi- 
ence was  gathered.  The  opening  services  were  in  charge  of  Mr. 
Osborne,  and  Mr.  Jones  presided.  In  addition  to  addresses  by  the 
foreign  delegates,  Mr.  Hawley,  of  Unity  Church,  and  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Allais,  pastor  of  the  French  M.  E.  Church  of  Chicago,  took  part. 
"  Perhaps  the  most  unique  feature  in  this  postscript  was  the  Mon- 
day noon  lunch,  as  guests  of  the  Outlook  Conference,  a  quiet,  schol- 
arly group  of  progressive  ministers  inside  the  so-called  orthodox 
churches,  who  on  this  occasion  threw  open  their  doors  and  received 
as  their  guests  not  only  the  foreign  delegates,  but  the  resident  pastors 
of  the  Unitarian,  Universalist,  Independent,  and  Jewish  churches. 
The  luncheon  was  served  in  one  of  the  rooms  of  the  Y.  M.  C.  A. 
building,  which  was  crowded  to  its  utmost  capacity.  Some  fifty 
ministers  broke  bread  together.  Representatives  of  the  Chicago  Uni- 
versity, Baptist,  Presbyterian,  Congregational,  and  the  unorthodox 
churches,  sat  down  together.  Professor  Foster,  of  the  university, 
was  called  upon  to  preside,  and  after  the  luncheon  graciously  pre- 
sented the  foreign  delegates.  Guests  from  Seattle,  Kansas  City, 
and  nearer  home  were  called  upon.  Professor  Montet  spoke  in 
French,  and  Dr.  Loba,  of  the  Evanston  Congregational  Church, 
felicitously  interpreted  his  words  in  English.  Dr.  Hunter  here,  as 
elsewhere,  carefully  prepared  his  address  beforehand.  Of  Mr. 
Davis's  charming  address,  full  of  kindly  fellowship  and  lofty  spirit- 
ual earnestness,  we  can  give  no  report;  neither  can  we  of  the  kindly 
and  felicitous  words  of  the  presiding  officer,  Professor  Foster.  Al- 
together the  noonday  luncheon  was  but  another  significant  sugges- 
tion of  that  fellowship  that  is  almost  here, — the  fellowship  that  will 
discard  the  technical  differences  and  the  historical  traditions,  find 


628 

joy  not  only  in  communion  of  thought,  but  in  a  shoulder-to-shoulder 
enthusiasm  in  common  tasks,  the  facing  of  common  obligations. 

"After  luncheon  the  delegates  were  shown  the  marvels  of  the 
Corn  Show,  and  in  the  evening  the  program  came  to  an  end  in  a 
reception  given  at  the  Abraham  Lincoln  Centre.  Rev.  Professor 
Montet  also  addressed  on  Monday  morning  a  gathering  of  Method- 
ist ministers,  and  was  introduced  by  the  Methodist  bishop  presiding 
as  'the  successor  of  John  Calvin.' 

"  The  informal  leave-taking  in  the  evening  at  the  Lincoln  Centre, 
addresses  which  followed  the  handshaking,  and  inspiriting  song 
by  Miss  Jennie  Johnson,  and  preceded  the  coffee  and  chocolate,  are, 
of  course,  unreportable.  Dr.  George  F.  Shears  spoke  for  the  laity 
of  Chicago  and  the  Lincoln  Centre.  Dr.  Montet,  released  from  the 
thrall  of  a  foreign  tongue,  glowed  with  kindliness  and  found  all  hearts 
in  the  Esperanto  of  the  kindly  eye,  the  playful  countenance  and  sug- 
gestive gesture.  Immediately  following  him,  his  fellow-country- 
man, the  Rev.  Mr.  Allais,  pastor  of  the  French  Methodist  Church, 
rendered  the  speech  in  graceful  English. 

u  Closing  words  were  spoken  by  Mr.  Davis,  of  London,  and  they 
were  words  laden  with  tenderness,  grace,  and  the  holiness  of  large 
views  and  high  purposes. 

"  This  was  indeed  a  tiny  postscript  to  the  great  Boston  Congress, 
but  it  was  a  real  congress  which  quickened  hearts,  clarified  heads, 
and  disintegrated  barriers. 

"Bless  them  for  coming!  May  all  good  graces  wait  on  them 
wherever  they  go !  The  peace  that  belongs  to  the  children  of  God 
is  theirs." 

To  resume  our  story: — 

Professor  Montet  lectured  at  the  University  of  Pennsylvania 
and  preached  in  the  French  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  Phil- 
adelphia and  elsewhere.  Professor  Bonet-Maury  gave  a  course  of 
lectures  at  McGill  University,  Montreal,  and  addressed  the  Cercle 
Francais  in  Boston.  Professor  Otto  Pfleiderer  gave  a  course  of 
lectures  at  the  Harvard  Divinity  School,  and  at  a  reception  in  his 
honor  by  the  Deutsche  Gesellschaft  in  Boston  spoke  on  the  relig- 
ious situation  in  Germany. 

The  Worcester  and  Connecticut  Valley  Unitarian   Conferences 


629 

were  also  favored  with  addresses  by  Rev.  Miss  von  Petzold,  Rev. 
S.  Kanda,  Rev.  T.  P.  Spedding,  and  Revs.  Charles  Peach  and  Alex- 
ander Webster. 

Of  the  German  delegates,  Rev.  L.  Ragaz,  of  Basel,  gave  the  prin- 
cipal address  at  the  one  hundred  and  twenty-fifth  anniversary  cele- 
bration of  the  Smithfield  Street  German  Evangelical  Protestant 
Church  in  Pittsburg,  Penn.,  the  longest  established  German-Amer- 
ican church  in  the  United  States.  Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer  preached 
in  Rev.  Hugo  Eisenlohr's  German-American  church  in  Cincinnati 
to  a  great  audience.  The  sermon  is  to  be  printed.  Rev.  Dr.  Fischer, 
of  Berlin,  preached  in  the  German  Church  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
St.  Louis  on  October  6.  All  these  appointments  were  made  by 
the  International  Congress  Committee.  Other  delegates  spoke  in 
New  York,  Philadelphia,  Buffalo,  Montreal,  London,  Ottawa, 
Toronto,  Winnipeg,  and  at  other  points.  Mr.  Sim  Harris,  of  Eng- 
land, even  addressed  the  students  of  the  Pacific  Unitarian  Theolog- 
ical School  in  Berkeley,  Cal.,  on  his  impressions  of  the  Congress, 
and  Rev.  S.  Kanda,  on  his  return  journey  to  Japan,  similarly 
reported  the  Congress  proceedings  to  his  old-time  friends  of  the 
First  Unitarian  Church  in  San  Francisco. 

In  these  and  other  similar  ways  the  influence  of  the  Congress  has 
been  extended,  and  distant  communities  have  been  made  to  feel 
something  of  its  glow  and  uplift. 


630 


APPENDIX. 


LETTERS  AND  COMMUNICATIONS  TO  THE  INTER- 
NATIONAL CONGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS  LIBERALS 
AT  BOSTON. 

Manchester  College,  Oxford,  England. 

My  friend,  the  Rev.  V.  D.  Davis,  B.A.,  asks  me  to  send  through  him  a  mes- 
sage to  your  great  meeting  from  this  college.  Permit  me,  then,  on  its  behalf 
to  offer  a  few  words  of  respectful  and  affectionate  greeting.  Its  dedication  "to 
Truth,  to  Liberty,  to  Religion,"  with  no  limiting  restrictions  of  name  or  creed, 
points  to  the  broad  platform  on  which  you  are  gathering  brethren  from  so  many 
churches  in  fraternal  concord.  Your  Congress  will  supply  a  noble  example  of 
that  faith  which  is  growing  stronger  year  by  year  throughout  all  civilized  lands, 
in  the  fundamental  unity  that  underlies  the  partial  expressions  of  our  different 
theologies.  Great,  indeed,  are  the  labors  that  yet  await  us  in  the  attempts  to 
disengage  the  sentiments  that  unite  from  the  thoughts  that  divide,  to  bring 
them  into  clear  expression  amid  the  rivalries  of  sects,  and  set  them  in  vital 
relation  with  the  social  needs  and  reforming  energies  of  our  time.  In  this  task 
we  are  sustained  by  each  other's  sympathy.  The  churches  which  will  assemble 
under  your  earnest  and  genial  presidency  may  lie  far  apart  from  one  another 
in  various  lands,  under  divers  forms  of  ecclesiastical  polity.  But  they  will  all 
feel  the  quickening  of  a  wider  life,  as  they  realize  that  they  are  not  mere  isolated 
units.  They  have  a  common  fellowship,  they  form  a  company  of  their  own  in  the 
great  army  which  is  vowed  to  the  warfare  with  ignorance  and  indifference,  with 
selfishness  and  sin. 

May  the  meetings  which  have  been  organized  with  so  much  devotion  fulfil 
your  warmest  hopes!  May  those  who  come  from  the  East  and  the  West,  from 
the  North  and  the  South,  feel  that  they  do  indeed  sit  down  in  that  kingdom 
of  God  which  is  not  the  dream  of  a  distant  future,  but  the  constant  presence  of 
the  Spirit  within  us. 

Believe  me,  with  the  warmest  regards,  always  faithfully  yours, 

J.  Estlln  Carpenter. 

London,  England. 

I  wish  with  all  my  heart  that  I  could  say  "Yes"  to  your  very  kind  and  tempting 
invitation  to  me  to  speak  at  your  international  gathering  in  September.     But, 


631 

alas!  I  am  afraid  it  is  quite  impossible.  I  have  just  begun  a  piece  of  work 
which  will  take  me  the  whole  of  the  coming  year,  and  probably  a  little  more. 
Till  it  is  finished,  I  must  not  think  of  a  journey  to  America, — which,  however, 
we  hope  to  accomplish  as  soon  as  the  book  is  fairly  out  of  my  hands. 

It  would  have  been  a  great  pleasure  and  stimulus  to  join  your  meetings. 
Now  it  is  not  so  much  a  day  of  pulling  down  as  a  day  of  building  up.  Nor 
shall  we  advance  much  further,  I  believe,  in  the  work  of  sweeping  away  the  old 
misconceptions  till  the  body  of  new  thought  is  more  firmly  outlined.  "On  ne 
detruit  que  ce  qu'on  remplace,"  as  Amiel  said  long  ago.  It  is  here  your  inter- 
national gathering  may  be  fruitful.  All  success  to  the  Boston  meeting!  I  shall 
read  the  record  of  it  with  the  greatest  interest,  and  much,  much  regret  that  I 
cannot  be  there. 

With  kind  regards,  believe  me, 

Yours  very  sincerely, 

Mary  (Humphry)  Ward. 


London. 

...  I  wish  I  could  join  in  a  deeply  interesting  conference  of  this  kind.  It 
would  give  me  the  sincerest  pleasure,  but  it  seems  almost  impossible.  Moreover, 
I  have  never  been  in  the  United  States,  and  it  seems  unjust  to  leave  the  Old 
World  without  seeing  the  New.  I  will  keep  your  kind  invitation  in  my  mind, 
and,  when  the  time  comes,  will  try  to  join  the  Congress.  But,  to  my  regret,  you 
cannot  put  me  in  your  programme.  I  wish  this  could  be  so,  and  I  am  grateful 
for  your  purpose.  Yours  very  sincerely, 

Stopford  A.  Brooke. 


London. 

Telegram. — Friends  in  the  old  country  send  greetings  [and]  good  wishes  to 
Internationals  assembled. 

Ion  Pritchard. 


Senat  de  Belgique,  Brussels,  Belgium. 

Nothing  could  have  flattered  and  pleased  me  more  than  your  kind  invitation 
to  attend  the  Fourth  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  to  be  held  in 
Boston  from  September  22-27  next,  as  all  my  personal  sympathies  are  with  this 
movement.  Unfortunately,  I  shall  not  be  able  to  leave  Belgium  at  that  time, 
and  therefore  must  decline  the  hospitalities  I  should  have  been  so  glad  to  accept 
from  the  committee  in  charge  of  the  Congress.     I  remain 

Faithf ully  yours, 

Goblet  d'Alviella, 


632 


Independent  Congregation, 
Brussels,  Belgium. 


I  have  received  the  kind  communication  of  the  committee  inviting  me  to  the 
Fourth  International  Congress  at  Boston.  I  feel  extremely  grateful  to  the 
committee  for  the  great  honor  and  kindness  shown  to  me. 

I  would  most  willingly  show  my  thankfulness  by  contributing  as  best  I  could 
to  the  success  of  the  Congress.  But,  unfortunately,  the  decline  of  my  health 
makes  it  impossible  for  me  to  attempt  the  journey  and  to  be  of  any  real  service 
to  the  Congress. 

With  renewed  thanks  and  best  wishes  for  a  great  success, 

Yours  very  truly, 

James  Hocart. 


Paris,  France. 

I  had  hoped  up  to  the  present  moment  to  be  able  to  come  to  the  International 
Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  in  Boston,  in  accordance  with  the  gracious 
invitation  extended  to  me  some  months  since.  But  the  relatively  short  time  at 
my  disposal,  and  other  considerations,  prevent  me  from  carrying  out  my  desire, 
and  to  my  great  regret  I  shall  not  be  able  to  take  part  in  the  meetings  of  the 
Fourth  Congress. 

All  my  sympathies  are  enlisted  in  the  spirit  which  has  actuated  these  religious 
reunions,  and  my  friends  Jean  Reville  and  fidouard  Montet  will  know  how  to 
express  to  you,  and  to  the  members  of  the  Council,  my  deep  regret,  as  well  as 
my  warm  remembrance  of  the  precious  days  we  spent  at  the  Congress  in  Geneva 
some  two  years  since. 

I  wish  to  enroll  myself  among  the  subscribers  to  the  volume  which  will  con- 
tain the  papers  and  proceedings  of  the  Congress. 

Believe  me,  dear  and  honored  colleague,  to  be  sincerely,  in  the  spirit  of  our 
Master,  Your  devoted 

J.  FLmile  Roberty, 
Pastor  and  President  of  the  Presbyleral 
Council  oj  the  Church  of  I'Oratoire 
[Translated.]  de  Louvre,  Paris. 


Paris,  France. 

I  thank  you  very  sincerely  for  your  invitation  for  myself  and  my  wife  to  attend 
the  Congress  in  Boston  next  year.  Certainly,  it  is  as  tempting  as  it  is  generous, 
and  nothing  could  prevent  us  from  accepting  it,  even  at  this  early  date,  were  it 
not  for  the  eighty  years  which  look  me  squarely  in  the  face  the  10th  of  next 
March  (this  I  must  say,  with  benignity  and  courage  to  go  forward)  and  the  all- 
engrossing  duties  which  now  call  us  to  this  centre  of  the  great  and  long-impend- 
ing religious  crisis  in  our  dear  and  much-tried  country.  In  any  case  we  shall 
be  with  you,  and  all  the  brethren,  of  whatever  faith  they  may  be,  in  your  efforts 


633 

for  peace  and  good  fellowship  among  the  followers  of  Christ  and  the  worshippers 
of  the  only  true  God  and  our  most  loving  Father. 
This  is  written  with  our  joint  love  and  prayers. 

Hyacinthe  Loyson. 


Paris,  France. 

Having  the  last  month,  by  absolute  order  of  my  doctor,  taken  a  cure  of  com- 
plete silence,  I  can  again  speak  and  do  my  work.  But  any  supplementary 
effort  is  forbidden.  So  I  am  afraid  to  get  so  very  tired  the  coming  year.  You 
know  that  a  new  and  larger  meeting-place  is  just  in  building  for  us.  It  will  be, 
we  hope,  finished  about  Christmas.  Next  summer  another  part  of  the  new 
building  is  to  be  finished.  My  holidays  of  1907  will,  I  am  sorry  to  foresee,  be 
given  to  a  complete  rest.     So  I  cannot  give  any  promise  in  advance. 

Thank  you  for  your  kind  letter,  to  which,  if  my  heart  could  make  the  law  of 
life,  I  would  have  given  an  enthusiastic  "Yes"  for  an  answer. 

Truly  yours, 

Charles  Wagner. 


Castres  (Tarn),  France. 

Disciple  convaincu  du  Christianisme  primitif,  spirituel  et  moral,  tel  qu'il 
nous  est  revele"  dans  la  personne,  la  vie  et  Penseignement  de  Jesus-Christ, — 
mais  adversaire  non  moins  convaincu  de  tout  espece  de  Ditheisme,  de  Tri- 
thelsme,  de  Quatritheisme,  tel  que  l'ont  fabrique"  les  traditions  successives  de 
l'histoire, — 

J'ai  l'honneur  d'adherer  a  un  unitarianisme  Chretien,  positif  et  vivant,  tel 
qu'il  s'affirmera  dans  le  prochain  Congres  unitaire  de  Boston. 

Camille  Rabatjd, 
Pasteur  en  Retraite,  Pres.  hon.  du  Consistoire 
de  Castres. 


Je  joins  mon  adhesion  a  celle  de  M.  le  pasteur  Rabaud 

"R  T>  TTKJ  T/MT 


Bruniquel,  pasteur  honoraire. 


£glise  Reforuee  de  Luneray, 
conseil  presbyteral. 

Cher  Monsieur, — J'e"tais  membre  du  Congres  de  Geneve  et  j'eprouve  une 
vraie  peine  de  ne  pouvoir  aller  a  Boston,  mais  je  serai  de  cceur  et  de  pensee  avec 
vous. 

Ancien  pretre  liberal  dans  l'figlise  Romaine,  j'ai  l'honneur  comme  Pasteur 
de  Luneray  d'etre  le  successeur  de  Reville,  et  tous  mes  efforts  n'ont  d'autre 
bout  que  de  travailler  a  l'extension  de  la  liberte*  et  de  Pindependance  de  pensee 


634 

religieuse  en  laquelle  seule  se  trouvent  la  vie  et  le  progres.  Ci-joint  ma  coti- 
sation  avec  mes  meilleurs  souhaits  pour  le  succes  du  Congres,  auquel  j'aurais 
tant  desire"  assister. 

Veuillez,  cher  Monsieur,  agreer  l'expression  de  mes  sentiments  tres-distingues. 

J.  JOYE. 


Chantegrillet,  pres  Crest, 
(Drome),  France. 

J'aurais  voulu  vous  e"crire  il  y  a  de"ja  longtemps  pour  vous  dire  mon  amer 
regret  de  n'avoir  pu  me  rendre  au  Congres.  Le  temps  m'a  manqu6,  absorbe" 
que  je  suis  par  la  crise  catholique  que  de  jour  en  jour  s'intensifie,  s'elargit,  se 
dramatise.  M.  Andre"  et  M.  Houtin  se  seront  acquittes,  j'espere,  du  message 
que  je  leur  avais  donne"  de  vous  dire,  a  vous  et  a  toute  Passemblee  ma  profonde 
sympathie  et  mes  vifs  regrets. 

Au  revoir,  cher  Monsieur,  croyez  moi  votre  tres  cordialement  devoue" 

Paul  Sabatier. 


N'mes,  France. 

J'ai  l'honneur  de  vous  remettre  sous  ce  pli  un  mandat-poste  international 
pour  etre  admis  au  Congres  international  des  Unitaires,  etc. 

Heureux  de  te*moigner  ainsi  ma  sympathie  pour  "ceux  qui  dans  tous  les  pays 
aspirent  a  unir  religion  pure  et  liberte*  complet,"je  vous  prie  de  vouloir  bien 
agreer  l'expression  de  mes  sentiments  de  confraternite  chretienne. 

G.  Benoit-  Germain, 

Secretaire  du  Conseil  Presbyteral 
de  V&glise  Chretienne  Reformee 
de  Nimes  {France — Gard). 


Deutscher  Protestantenverein, 

Berlin,  September  7,  1907. 

The  German  Protestant  Society  has  commissioned  the  Rev.  Max  Fischer, 
doctor  of  theology,  member  of  the  council,  to  represent  them  at  the  Liberal 
Religious  Congress,  meeting  in  Boston,  U.S.A.,  and  to  express  their  hearty 
wishes  for  the  success  of  the  meeting. 

The  Protestant  Society  takes  this  opportunity  of  assuring  the  Congress  that 
it  gives  them  great  pleasure  to  be  able  to  take  part  in  their  deliberations. 

The  Congress  is  working  towards  establishing  views  of  human  life  and  the 
universe  in  harmony  with  the  progress  of  science,  and  aims  at  developing  a 
liberal  Christianity. 

The  German  Protestant  Society  considers  its  foremost  object  to  be  to  work 
for  the  realization  of  Christian  liberty  in  the  Protestant  Church  of  Germany 
and  in  religion  as  proclaimed  by  Luther.    In  the  name  of  the  gospel  they  deny 


635 

the  right  of  any  party  in  the  Church  to  enforce  binding  creeds  after  the  manner 
of  the  infallible  Church  of  Rome  and  of  Protestant  Orthodoxy. 

Thus  the  Congress  at  Boston  and  our  German  Protestant  Society  have  the 
same  aims,  and  the  work  of  the  one  will  help  forward  the  work  of  the  other. 
We  therefore  heartily  wish  success  to  the  Congress  meeting  at  Boston. 

K.  Schrader,  President. 
[Translated.] 

Berlin,  Germany,  September  20,  1907. 

Cable  Message. — The  German  Protestantenverein,  Friends  of  Evangelical 
Freedom  in  the  Rhine  Lands,  and  Union  for  Evangelical  Freedom  in  Hanover 
invite  the  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  to  hold  its  next  session 
in  Berlin. 

Karl  Schrader, 
President  German  Protestantenverein. 


Philosophical  Faculty, 
University  of  Jena,  Germany. 

There  is  very  much  to  induce  me  to  come  to  the  Congress  in  Boston,  but  also 
much  seems  to  make  it  impossible.  It  would  give  me  great  pleasure  to  make 
the  personal  acquaintance  of  so  many  friends  and  comrades  of  the  spirit  who 
are  to  gather  there,  and  at  the  same  time  gain,  in  the  most  agreeable  manner 
that  can  be  imagined,  an  insight  into  American  life,  with  whose  great  signifi- 
cance for  the  culture  of  our  day  and  the  future  I  am  profoundly  impressed. 
How  gladly  would  I,  on  my  part,  contribute  a  little,  that  in  this  land  of  mighty 
striving  and  uplift  a  freer  conception  of  religion  might  more  and  more  control 
the  spirits  of  men!  All  these  things  unite  in  making  very  attractive  the  invitation 
which  you  extend  and  which  has  given  me  such  sincere  gratification.  But 
many  considerations  dissuade  me  from  its  acceptance,  chief  of  which  is  the 
excessive  burden  of  my  literary  work.  New  books  come  into  being  through 
inward  compulsion,  the  old  ones  urgently  call  for  new  editions,  my  relations 
with  many  countries  and  schools  of  thought,  especially  of  late  with  liberal 
Catholicism,  make  increasing  demands  upon  my  time.  All  these  things  to- 
gether occupy  and  absorb  me  so  completely  that  for  years  I  have  not  even  been 
able  to  take  a  real  vacation.  How  can  time  be  found  for  a  journey  to  America  ? 
The  year  to  come  is  already  crowded  with  literary  engagements. 

It  will,  however,  be  a  sincere  pleasure  for  me  to  take  part  in  your  meetings 
by  sending  you  a  little  treatise,  written  especially  for  your  Congress.  Its  title 
may  be  "What  does  a  Free  Christianity  require  in  order  to  win  the  Victory?" 

Cherish,  I  beg  of  you,  despite  my  declination,  a  friendly  regard  for  me,  and 
accept  my  sincere  thanks  for  all  the  good  will  expressed  in  your  invitation. 

Yours  faithfully, 
[Translated.]  Rud.  Eucken,  Ph.D. 


636 

University  or  Jena,  Germany. 

Accept  my  heartfelt  thanks  for  the  kind  invitation  to  participate  in  the  Fourth 
International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals.  Your  added  invitation  to  me 
to  contribute  a  paper  to  this  Congress  I  feel  to  be  a  great  courtesy  and  honor 
on  the  part  of  your  committee.  Be  assured  that  it  would  interest  and  rejoice 
me  very  much  if  I  could  accede  to  this  call,  and  through  the  medium  of  this 
Congress  learn  to  know  so  many  able  theologians  as  will  gather  there.  I  have 
delayed  until  now  my  reply  to  your  letter,  since  it  is  not  easy  for  me  to  write  a 
declination.  But  this  I  am  unfortunately  compelled  to  do.  Other  obstacles 
to  such  a  journey  I  might  perhaps  overcome,  but  not  the  main  one,  which  is 
that  in  the  last  half  of  September  the  theological  examinations  of  the  Thuringian 
State  Church  take  place,  in  which,  as  Dean,  I  am  compelled  to  take  part. 
Hence  I  must  forego  anything  which  at  that  season  will  prevent  my  participa- 
tion in  this  function. 

With  regret  and  assurances  of  esteem, 

Your  obedient 
[Translated.]  H.  H.  Wendt,  D.D. 


University  of  Jena,  Germany. 

Permit  me  to  express  my  sincere  and  hearty  thanks  for  your  kind  invitation 
to  your  International  Congress  of  this  year  in  Boston.  If  my  acknowledgment 
reaches  you  only  now,  I  beg  you  to  believe  that  this  was  not  due  to  any  lack  of 
appreciation  for  the  honor  you  have  done  me  or  any  want  of  sympathy  with 
your  important  cause,  which  is  our  common  cause.  Quite  the  contrary.  It 
was  my  ardent  desire  and  my  constant  hope  to  clear  away  all  the  obstacles  to 
my  journey  which  presented  themselves  that  induced  me  to  defer  from  day  to 
day  my  reply  to  your  amiable  invitation. 

In  opposition  to  my  desire  and  hope,  it  has  not  been  possible  for  me  to  over- 
come the  hindrances  to  my  journey,  the  chief  of  which  is  that  a  book,  whose 
completion  by  a  certain  date  I  have  contracted  for,  is  not  so  advanced  as  I  had 
hoped.  Sorry  as  I  am,  I  must  forego  attendance  on  this  Congress,  and  can 
only  hope  that  at  some  subsequent  session  I  may  be  able  to  participate  in  its 
proceedings,  and  besides  the  acquaintance  of  my  valued  friend,  its  Secretary, 
make  the  acquaintance  of  the  other  leaders  in  this  movement. 

With  best  wishes  for  an  uplifting  session  this  autumn,  I  am 

Yours, 

H.  Weinel,  D.D. 
[Translated.] 

University  or  Goettingen,  Germany. 

Accept  my  hearty  thanks  for  your  kind  invitation  to  the  Fourth  International 
Congress  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Theologians.  I  do  not  need  to  tell  you 
how  much  honored  I  feel  by  the  kind  confidence  which  is  expressed  in  this 
invitation.     Be  assured  that  I  would  gladly  come  and  take  part  in  your  gather- 


637 

ing,  and  that  I  cherish  the  positive  expectation  that  I  should  feel  at  home  among 
you  and  should  enjoy  the  spiritual  communion. 

Notwithstanding  this  I  shall  have  to  ask  you  to  excuse  me  if  I  do  not  come. 
I  am  at  present  too  much  weighed  down  with  labors  outside  my  vocation  to 
enable  me  to  devote  my  autumn  vacation  to  a  journey  to  Boston.  Journeys 
for  lecturing  purposes  in  February,  March,  and  April,  have  taken  up  almost  my 
entire  vacation  this  year,  and  for  the  autumn  I  have  made  other  engagements. 
The  founding  of  the  association  Freunde  Evangelischer  Freiheit  (Friends  of 
Evangelical  Freedom)  in  Hanover,  of  which  you  know,  and  its  promotion,  also 
absorb  much  of  my  time  and  strength,  to  which  must  be  added  scientific  inves- 
tigations.    With  all  my  heart,  however,  I  wish  your  undertaking  a  great  success. 

With  best  esteem,  Yours, 

W.  Botjsset,  D.D. 
[Translated.] 

University  or  Heidelberg,  Germany. 

Your  kind  invitation  to  take  part  in  the  Congress  of  religious  free  thinkers  in 
Boston  I  esteem  a  great  honor  and  pleasure,  for  which  I  heartily  thank  you.  I 
have  from  the  first  had  an  active  sympathy  with  your  endeavors,  and  I  do  not 
question  that  in  the  essential  things  I  should  be  in  good  understanding  with  the 
gentlemen  of  your  committee.  I  have  already  once  enjoyed  the  kind  hospitality 
of  America,  and  recall  with  the  greatest  respect  that  world  of  work  and  activity. 
Under  these  circumstances  I  have  fully  considered  the  matter,  and  experienced 
a  lively  wish  to  accept  your  invitation.  But  the  hindrances  prove  too  great, 
and  I  can  only  ask  to  be  excused.  I  would  gladly  again  visit  your  beautiful 
city  of  Boston  and  particularly  Harvard  University.  But  I  must  forego  this 
pleasure.  With  sincere  thanks, 

E.  Troeltsch,  D.D. 
[Translated.] 

Charlottenburg,  near  Berlin,  Germany. 

To  my  great  regret  I  must  forego  the  pleasure  and  honor  of  appearing  at  your 
Congress.  My  work  will  not  this  year  permit  such  an  interruption.  I  have 
made  various  literary  engagements  for  which  the  university  vacation  is  indis- 
pensable.   Express  my  thanks  to  the  committee,  and  believe  me 

Your  devoted 
[Translated.]  Professor  Dr.  Simons. 


Bremen,  Germany. 

It  has  not  been  possible  for  me  to  come  to  the  Boston  Congress.  I  can  only 
inform  you  by  letter  that  I  greet  with  my  whole  heart  this  International 
Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Religious  Liberals,  and  wish  it  all  success. 

That  these  free-thinking  men  should  meet  in  the  New  World,  in  your  cele- 


638 

brated  city,  look  into  each  other's  eyes,  and  form  a  union  of  friendship  and 
community  of  purpose,  is  to  me  a  happy  reflection  and  beautiful  augury.  Truth 
is  our  common  aim,  and  the  love  of  truth  unites  us  all,  wherever  may  be  our 
field  of  labor.  We  know  ourselves  to  be  servants  of  God,  and  the  Christians 
among  us  as  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  owe  it  to  impart  all  they  have  received  to 
their  brethren.  We  believe  that  God  needs  us  for  His  divine  purpose,  and 
counts  on  us  and  is  well  pleased  with  our  endeavors  in  His  cause.  So  our  great 
reformer  Luther  relied  entirely  on  the  Word,  and  through  the  Word  accom- 
plished so  much,  and  so  Tolstoi  tells  us:  "The  mightiest  of  free  forces,  a  force 
which  cannot  be  imprisoned,  is  that  which  appears  in  the  soul  of  man  when  he 
in  solitariness  reflects  upon  the  events  of  the  world,  and  then  in  the  simplest, 
most  natural  way  communicates  his  thoughts  to  his  wife,  his  brother,  his  friend, 
and  to  all  with  whom  he  comes  in  contact,  and  from  whom  to  withhold  the  truth 
he  would  deem  it  to  be  a  sin.  Neither  milliards  of  roubles  nor  millions  of 
troops,  cannon,  wars,  or  revolutions,  can  bring  about  that  which  a  free  man  can 
bring  to  pass  if  he  simply  utters  that  which  he  knows  to  be  true,  entirely  inde- 
pendently of  that  which  is  established  or  which  is  taught  him." 

So  also  I  see,  prophetically,  that  the  word  of  the  religious  free  thinkers  in 
Boston  will  send  its  effluent  waves  hither  and  thither,  will  quicken  men's  souls 
and  inspire  them. 

May  all  the  addresses  to  be  held  at  your  Congress  fulfil  this  vision,  and  all, 
on  their  return  home,  bear  with  them  this  religious  and  moral  momentum,  and 
impart  it  from  their  pulpits  or  their  professional  chairs  to  their  brothers,  friends, 
and  the  younger  generation!  It  is  my  hope  that  your  Congress  may  yet  meet 
in  Germany,  and  that  we  may  meet  face  to  face  with  the  men  with  whom  we 
have  long  felt  ourselves  to  be  united  in  spirit.  Give  to  all  our  brothers  the 
hearty  greeting  of  a  liberal  pastor  of  the  ancient  and  free  Hanse  town,  Bremen. 

Your  devoted, 
[Translated.]  O.  Veeck,  D.D. 


Wiesbaden,  Germany. 

I  am  unfortunately  unable  to  come  to  the  Boston  Congress.  I  send  you  here- 
with a  modest  contribution  towards  it  in  the  form  of  a  pamphlet,  on  page  42  of 
which  you  will  find  it  recorded  that  at  the  time  of  the  union  of  Protestant  churches 
of  Nassau  the  basis  was  simply  the  recognition  of  God,  Duty,  and  Immortality. 
This  remains  to-day  the  foundation  of  the  common  belief  of  our  churches,  which 
in  all  essentials  is  at  one  with  the  Unitarian  confession  of  Love  to  God  and  Love 
to  Man  as  the  only  necessary  bond  of  the  future  church  of  true  catholicity  and 
humanity.  This  confession  needs,  however,  to  be  supplemented  by  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Saviour  and  Redeemer  of  men.  But  in 
the  religious  education  of  the  people  by  the  State  the  principles  of  Love  to  God 
and  Man  are  sufficient.  The  Jesus  Cult  and  the  Sacraments  may  be  left  to  the 
administration  of  the  churches. 


639 

I  send  greeting  to  your  Fourth  International  Congress  of  Progressive  and 
Liberal  Christians,  and  wish  it  all  success. 

Th.  Schneider,  Professor. 
[Translated.] 

Cologne,  Germany. 

It  would  be  a  great  pleasure  to  journey  across  the  ocean  and  take  part  in  a 
gathering  in  which  the  representatives  of  Unitarian  faith  from  all  the  enlight- 
ened countries  of  the  earth  are  assembled.  I  should  return  from  it  strengthened 
and  inspired.  But  this  may  not  be,  if  only  because  my  acquaintance  with  Eng- 
lish is  defective. 

I  was  eight  years  and  more  a  German  pastor  in  Bucharest,  Roumania,  then 
in  Belgrade,  and  since  1891  have  been  a  Protestant  pastor  in  Cologne,  the  only 
Unitarian  among  my  colleagues.     May  the  Congress  have  a  brilliant  success! 

Yours  faithfully, 
[Translated  ]  Jatho. 


Free  Evangelical  Congregation, 
koenigsberg,  prussia. 

If  this  year  we  are  unfortunately  prevented  from  sending  a  delegate  to  the 
Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  in  Boston,  we  shall  yet,  even  at  this  distance, 
take  part  in  its  proceedings  with  lively  interest  and  sympathy. 

The  number  of  independent,  self-sustaining  congregations  which  endeavor  to 
unite  "pure  religion  and  perfect  liberty"  is,  unfortunately,  very  small  as  yet  in 
Germany.  All  the  more  do  we  look  for  encouragement  and  the  strengthening 
of  our  aims  by  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Relig- 
ious Thinkers  and  Workers,  which  justly  claims  our  entire  sympathy.  In  the 
year  1884  we  were  brought  into  closer  relations  with  the  Unitarian  fellowship 
through  our  now  deceased  minister,  Dr.  Julius  Rupp. 

We  send  a  hearty  greeting  to  the  participants  in  the  Congress,  and  hope  that 
the  proceedings  may  take  a  happy  course. 

Die  Freie  Evangelische  Gemeinde  ztj 
[Translated.]  Koenigsberg  in  Pretjssen. 


Danzig.  Prussia. 

Accept  my  warm  acknowledgments  for  the  invitation  to  take  part  in  the 
International  Congress  in  Boston. 

You  are  aware  with  what  joy  and  enthusiasm  I  participated  as  a  delegate  in 
the  first  two  Congresses  at  London  and  Amsterdam.  With  the  same  disposi- 
tion of  the  heart  I  greet  the  Boston  Congress.  My  love  for  the  great  and  timely 
undertakings  of  this  Association  for  religious  freedom  and  respect  for  each 
other's  religious  convictions  has  since  then  only  increased.  I  have  followed 
all  their  proceedings  with  the  deepest  interest,  and,  if  I  did  not  keep  in  closer 


640 

touch  with  you  through  correspondence,  the  cause  was  solely  my  own  occupa- 
tions and  duties,  which  first  had  to  be  attended  to. 

I  particularly  welcome  the  clause  in  your  program  which  declares  that  you 
do  not  require  of  your  membership  "the  acceptance  of  any  formal  dogma  or 
particular  church  or  association,"  and  that  you  also  invite  to  your  Congress  the 
unchurched  and  non-church  elements  in  Germany.  Personally,  I  am  much 
drawn  to  America,  the  land  of  freedom  in  which  I  first  cast  off  the  fetters 
of  Rome.  Whether  I  can  come  to  your  Congress  as  a  delegate  I  do  not  yet 
know.  Perhaps  a  representative  of  the  Bund  der  Freien  Religiosen  Gemeinden 
in  Deutschland  (Union  of  Free  Religious  Congregations  in  Germany)  may  yet 
be  sent  to  your  Boston  gathering.  The  matter  is  now  under  consideration  by 
the  committee. 

I  remain,  with  respect,  Yours, 

G.  Schieler,  D.D., 
Minister  of  the  Free  Religious  Societies  of 
Danzig  and  Tilsit,  and  Member  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Union  of  Free  Religious  Con- 
[Translated.]  gregations  in  Germany. 


Free  Religious  Congregation, 
Mannheim,  Baden,  Germany. 

I  ask  of  you  the  great  favor  to  convey  to  the  International  Congress  of  Relig- 
ious Liberals  in  Boston  my  sincere  sympathies.  Gladly  would  I  have  come  in 
person  to  hear  and  to  see  what  the  active  participation  of  so  many  prominent  and 
scholarly  men  in  your  land  of  freedom  has  been  able  to  accomplish  for  religious 
freedom,  and  to  rejoice  and  renew  my  spirit  by  the  spectacle  of  an  inclusive 
religious  tolerance,  which,  to  judge  by  your  publications,  has  found  a  permanent 
home  among  you. 

As  various  circumstances,  however,  prevent  such  a  journey  on  my  part,  I  will 
at  least  communicate  to  you  that  I  have  for  years  past  pursued  the  aims  and 
activities  of  the  Unitarian  body,  especially,  with  the  deepest  interest,  and  that  I 
trust  the  Boston  meeting  may  help  to  triumphant  results  the  cause  of  religious 
freedom.  I  beg  to  announce  my  adhesion  to  your  Congress  and  to  enclose  the 
subscription  fee. 

With  high  esteem,  Yours, 

Georg  Schneider, 
[Translated.]  Minister  Frei-religiose  Gemeinde,  Mannheim. 


Theological  Faculty  op  the  University, 
Christiania,  Norway. 

I  thank  you  heartily  for  the  invitation  to  attend  your  International  Congress 
for  Liberal  Christianity,  in  which  I  ought  to  take  part  with  lively  interest  and 
sympathy.     Because  of  my  university  duties,  it  is,  however,  unfortunately  not 


641 

possible  for  me  to  attend  it,  since  only  recently  I  received  a  leave  of  absence  for 
a  whole  semester  in  order  to  prosecute  my  studies  abroad. 
I  am,  with  esteem,  Yours, 

Johannes  Ording,  D.D. 
[Translated.] 

Unitarian  Society,  Christian!*,  Norway. 

We  are  well  organized  and  very  aggressive  in  our  propaganda  of  liberal 
thought.  We  have  a  monthly  magazine,  Unilaren,  which  I  edit,  and  which 
circulates  in  various  parts  of  the  country.     We  often  make  use  of  the  daily  press. 

Norway  ought  to  be  represented  at  the  Boston  meetings.  There  are  a  million 
and  a  half  of  my  countrymen  in  America:  not  a  few  of  them  are  Unitarians. 

The  prospects  for  our  faith  in  Norway  are  brighter.  The  whole  nation  is 
permeated  with  religious  liberalism,  and  besides  myself  there  are  other  men, 
more  able  and  prominent  than  I,  fighting  our  battles  and  working  for  our  cause. 

With  best  wishes,  Yours, 

Herman  Hatjgerud, 

Minister. 


Rotterdam,  1907. 

The  Remonstrant  Society,  at  its  general  meeting  of  the  4th  of  June,  1907, 
appointed  Professor  H.  Y.  Groenewegen,  D.D.,  of  Leyden,  as  a  delegate  and 
representative  of  the  Fourth  Congress  of  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian 
and  Other  Liberal  Thinkers  and  Workers  at  Boston,  and  charged  him  with  the 
expression  of  its  heartiest  sympathy  and  best  wishes  for  all  the  congenial  spirits 
and  fellow-workers  who  vindicate  the  principles  of  freedom  and  toleration  in 
religious  thought  and  life. 

For  the  Remonstrant  Society, 

The  Board  of  Delegates. 
Leemans,  President. 
B.  Van  Stolker,  Treasurer. 
W.  H.  Stenfert  Kroese,  Secretary. 


Nederlandsche  Hervormde  Gemeente, 
te  St.  Petersburg,  Russia. 

Dear  Sirs, — I  received  the  invitation  to  attend  the  fourth  meeting  of  the  Inter- 
national Congress  of  Religious  Liberals,  and  I  need  hardly  tell  you  that  all  my 
sympathies  go  with  it,  and  that  I  should  like  very  much  indeed  to  be  present  at  it. 
The  enormous  distance,  however,  which  separates  me  from  America  makes 
it  impossible  for  me  to  undertake  this  journey. 
Wishing  you  the  greatest  possible  success,  I  remain 

Sincerely  yours, 

F.  C.  A.  Pantekoek. 


642 


Budapest,  Hungary. 


I  am  duly  authorized  to  ask  you  to  enlist  among  the  members  of  the  Inter- 
national Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and 
Workers  the  "Budapesti  reformatus  theologiai  tanari  kar";  i.e.,  The  Body  of 
the  Professors  of  the  Budapest  Reformed  Theological  Academy,  represented 
by  Professor  Tarkas  Szots  (Budapest,  IX.,  Calvin-ter  F.),  also  editor  of  the  chief 
Hungarian  religious  periodical  of  both  Reformed  and  Evangelical  Protestants, 
the  Protestans  Szemle  (Protestant  Review),  and  secretary  of  the  Hungarian 
Protestant  Literary  Society. 

I  am  also  authorized  to  convey  to  the  Boston  International  Congress  of 
Religious  Liberals  the  heartfelt  greetings  and  earnest  esteem  of  the  said  body 
of  theological  professors  and  the  expression  of  their  enthusiastic  sympathies 
for  the  work  of  this  Congress  in  promoting  and  maintaining  religious  freedom 
and  the  free  cultivation  of  theological  science. 

I  am  very  glad  to  be  entitled  to  make  you  these  communications,  and  to  enjoy 
the  honor  of  sending  you  by  post-office  order  the  Congress  fee  for  the  said  dis- 
tinguished body  of  professors. 

With  best  wishes  Faithfully  your  friend, 

Geza  Schulek. 

Koi.ozsvar,  Hungary. 

Greeting  you  with  the  most  sympathetic  feelings,  we  pray  God's  blessing  upon 
your  work. 

We  intrusted  our  representative,  the  Rev.  Nicolas  Jozan,  of  Budapest,  to 
express  our  heartiest  greetings  to  you  by  the  living  word  also. 
In  the  name  of  the  Hungarian  Unitarian  churches, 

Joseph  Ferencz, 
Bishop  of  the  Unitarian  Churches  in  Hungary. 


Basel,  Switzerland. 

Honored  and  dear  Fellow-believers, — Accept  on  the  part  of  our  Swiss  associa- 
tion the  assurance  of  our  hearty  sympathy  with  your  undertaking.  May  your 
World-congress  sooner  arrive  at  the  goal  of  "a  betterment  of  the  Church  in  its 
head  and  members"  than  did  the  Councils  of  the  Middle  Ages,  one  of  which 
once  held  its  sessions  within  the  walls  of  this  city  of  Basel,  the  present  seat 
of  the  Swiss  Association  for  a  Free  Christianity. 

The  Rev.  G.  Schoenholzer,  of  Zurich,  is  commissioned  to  bring  you  our  greet- 
ings in  person. 

Conjoined  with  you  in  reverence  for  religious  freedom,  we  subscribe  ourselves 

[Translated.]  General  Committee  of  the  Schweizerischer 

Vereln  fuer  freies  Christentum. 

A.  Altherr,  President. 
Hans  Batjr,  Secretary. 


643 

Geneve,  Sdisse. 

J'ai  l'avantage  de  vous  informer  que  le  section  de  Geneve  de  l'Union  Suisse 
du  Christianisme  liberal,  en  re"ponse  au  desir  que  vous  avez  exprime-,  a  designe*, 
pour  la  repre'senter  au  Congres  Unitaire  de  Boston,  Messieurs  les  Pasteurs  Ernest 
Rochat  et  Louis  Maystre. 

Veuillez  dire  a  nos  amis  des  fitats-Unis  combien  le  sympathique  empresse- 
ment  qu'ils  n'avaient  mis  a  traverser  l'ocean,  pour  se  rendre  a  notre  appel,  au 
Congres  Unitaire  de  Geneve,  a  laisse  une  profonde  et  durable  impression  dans 
les  divers  milieux  du  protestantisme  genevois. 

Veuillez  aussi  leur  transmettre,  avec  le  salut  fraternal  de  la  Section  de  Geneve, 
ses  voeux  pour  1'entier  succes  du  Congres  Unitaire  de  Boston  dans  lequel  reside 
pour  tous  l'espoir  de  realiser  nouvelle  e"tape  du  progres  de  la  cause  liberate. 

Agreer,  Monsieur,  mes  salutations  de*vouees,  pour  la  Section  de  Geneve  de 
l'Union  Suisse  du  Chiistianisme  liberal. 

Li  Marechai,. 


Wellington,  New  Zealand. 

To  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Liberal  Religious  Thinkers 
meeting  in  Boston: 
Rev.  Dr.  Tudor  Jones  and  his  congregation  (about  400)  send  hearty  greetings 
to  the  Boston  Congress. 
The  Liberal  Religious  movement  is  making  great  progress  in  New  Zealand. 

Best  wishes, 

W.  Tudor  Jones. 


Calcutta,  India. 

In  response  to  your  kind  invitation  received  by  the  last  mail,  we,  on  behalf  of 
the  Brahmo-Somaj  in  India,  send  to  the  Fourth  International  Congress  of  Relig- 
ious Liberals  our  cordial  greetings.  The  blessing  of  God  rest  upon  the  Congress 
and  its  work.     May  it  prosper  from  year  to  year! 

We  regret  it  will  not  be  possible  to  send  any  delegates,  this  session,  to  the 
Congress  from  India.  The  Brahmo-Somaj  Committee,  however,  has  just  sent 
a  second  scholar,  Mr.  Binay  mohon  Sehanavis,  B.A.,  to  the  Meadville  Theolog- 
ical School,  and  it  is  hoped  he  will  arrive  in  Boston  just  in  time  to  attend  the 
meetings  of  the  Congress  before  proceeding  to  Meadville. 

I  remain  Fraternally  yours, 

B.  Nath  Sen, 
Secretary  Brahmo-Somaj  Committee. 


Calcutta,  India. 

I  remember  to  have  read  in  one  of  your  communications  to  the  Brahmo-Somaj 
Committee  an  expression  of  your  earnest  hope  to  hold  the  conference  once  in 


644 

India.  We  are  anxious  that  the  conference  of  1909  may  be  held  in  this  ancient 
home  of  many  historic  religions.  One  of  the  subjects  to  be  settled  at  the  coming 
Theistic  Conference  of  India  is  a  proposal  of  inviting  the  International  Council 
to  hold  its  biennial  conference  of  1909  in  India.  I  shall  be  very  much  obliged  if 
you  will  kindly  let  me  know  if  there  is  a  fair  possibility  of  the  Council's  accepting 
the  invitation.  The  principal  meetings  will  no  doubt  have  to  be  held  in  Cal- 
cutta during  the  winter;  but  many  of  the  visitors  may  profitably  visit  some  of 
the  important  towns  as  well,  and  we  shall  be  able  to  organize  well-attended 
meetings  in  such  towns  as  Bombay,  Madras,  Lahore,  Delhi,  Benares.  Of 
course  the  details  might  be  settled  later  on, 

Yours  sincerely, 

Hem  Chandra  Sarkar, 
Secretary  Theistic  Conference. 


Baixygung,  Calcutta,  India. 

.  .  .  Feeling  myself  honored  by  your  invitation,  and  especially  thankful  for 
your  kind  offer,  I  am  sorry  to  inform  you  that,  amongst  other  causes,  the  growing 
infirmities  of  my  parents,  and  especially  of  my  dear  mother,  will  not  permit  me 
to  be  far  away  from  them.  I  am  their  only  son,  and  they  are  broken-hearted 
over  my  apostasy  from  old  Hinduism.  So  I  am  keeping  as  close  to  them  as  pos- 
sible during  their  last  days,  which  cannot  be  prolonged  too  long.  I  need  hardly 
remark  that  it  would  have  given  me  the  sincerest  pleasure  to  be  associated  with 
all  of  you  in  a  noble  work.  Very  truly  yours, 

Siva  N.  Sastri. 


Prarthana  Samaj  Mandir, 
Girgaon,  Bombay,  India. 

I  have  the  pleasure  of  acknowledging  receipt  of  your  letter  inviting  the  Bom- 
bay Prarthana  Samaj  to  participate  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Biennial  Inter- 
national Congress  to  be  held  in  Boston  September  next. 

In  reply,  I  am  directed  by  the  Managing  Committee  of  the  Samaj  to  request 
you  to  be  good  enough  to  convey  to  your  Council  the  best  thanks  of  the  Samaj 
for  the  honor  so  done  to  them,  and  to  inform  you  that  the  Samaj  fully  sym- 
pathizes with  the  aims  and  objects  of  the  Council,  and  wishes  every  success  to 
the  proposed  Congress.  The  committee  has  requested  Mr.  V.  A.  Sukthanker, 
a  member  of  this  Samaj  who  is  at  present  in  Germany,  to  attend  the  Congress 
on  behalf  of  this  Samaj,  and  give  the  Council  all  the  information  regarding  this 
movement  personally.  In  case  he  is  not  able  to  do  so,  I  am  sending  you  under 
separate  cover  a  copy  of  the  last  printed  report  of  this  institution,  which  is 
identical  in  its  creed  and  purpose  with  that  known  as  the  Brahmo-Samaj  in 
other  parts  of  the  country.  I  trust  this  will  furnish  you  with  all  the  necessary 
information  desired.  Yours  fraternally, 

Secretary  Prarthana  Samaj. 


645 

Banda,  United  Provinces  of  Agra  and  Oddh,  India. 

I  very  heartily  respond  to  the  Bulletin  of  the  Fourth  International  Congress 
of  Religious  Liberals  to  be  held  in  Boston,  "the  home  of  Dr.  William  Ellery 
Channing,"  one  of  whose  "spiritual  descendants"  I  claim  to  be,  having  from 
him  received  the  first  inspiration  of  the  ideal  cosmopolitan  Christianity. 

Proud  though  I  am  to  count  myself  among  the  "Religious  Liberals,"  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  I  am  conservative,  never  having  advanced  further  than  the  truly 
representative  Christian,  the  nineteenth-century  exponent  of  the  religion  of 
Christ,  Channing,  whom  I  love  to  call  "  Saint,"  uncanonized  though  he  remain. 

Christianity  I  own,  the  religion  of  Christ,  the  religion  which  for  its  founda- 
tion stone  has  "  glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  on  earth  peace,  good  will  towards 
men, "  and  whose  fellowship  is  as  open  and  as  all-embracing  as  the  sympathies 
of  the  typical  Christian,  the  "Good  Samaritan,"  who  has,  I  fear,  not  yet  a  church 
dedicated  to  him  in  the  length  and  breadth  of  Christendom.  Unitarian  to  the 
backbone,  avowing  monotheism  with  the  Jew,  the  Christian,  and  the  Moham- 
medan, I  have  ceased  to  designate  myself  by  that  name,  because  I  find  the 
epithet  not  broad  enough  and  I  realize  Dr.  Martineau's  objection  to  be  so 
labelled.  For  similar  reasons  I  am  disinclined  to  describe  myself  a  Unitarian 
without  ceasing  to  be  one  in  reality,  and  I  prefer  to  assume  the  name  "  Christian  " 
without  any  adjective,  and  do  not  feel  tired  of  explaining  my  position  when  the 
question  arises  as  to  what  I  am  and  what  not,  though  the  process  is  not  simple. 
The  great  matter  for  wonder  is  that  the  most  liberal  definition  of  Christianity 
was  given  by  the  most  conservative  of  the  apostles,  Saint  Peter,  who  by  pro- 
claiming "God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth 
Him  and  worketh  righteousness  is  acceptable  to  Him,"  voiced  the  sentiments 
of  the  truly  International  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals  of  all  ages  and  all 
countries, — the  truth  of  which,  when  fully  realized,  establishes  a  creed  of  universal 
brotherhood,  which  has  not  yet  been  understood  and  I  am  afraid  was  not 
grasped  in  its  entirety  even  by  him  who  gave  utterance  to  those  words. 

A  Christian  from  India,  I  send  my  hearty  greetings  to  you,  dear  brethren,  who 
have  come  together  from  various  lands  to  attend  the  Fourth  International  Con- 
gress of  Religious  Liberals,  now  holding  its  sessions  most  appropriately  on  the 
soil  of  the  United  States,  typical  of  the  World  Republic  wherein  every  child  of 
God  is  destined  to  be  "a  law  unto  himself." 

Akbar  Masih. 


Ram  Mohdn  Ashram,  Girgaon,  Bombay. 

Allow  me  to  offer  through  you  my  personal  greetings  as  well  as  those  on  behalf 
of  my  Samaj  to  the  Council  which  is  doing  the  noblest  service  to  humanity  in 
the  name  of  the  Father  of  all.  While  writing  this,  most  unspeakably  sweet 
memories  are  reviving  in  me  of  the  gathering  at  Amsterdam,  in  which  I  had  the 
privilege  of  being  present.  I  do  not  know  if  any  one  will  be  able  to  go  from  here 
to  America,  and  I  shall  be  very  sorry  if  there  be  no  delegate  from  us  in  the 


646 

meetings  of  this  year.    However  my  friend,  Mr.  G.  Subba  Rau  is  there,  and, 
1  hope  he  will  represent  our  cause. 
Wishing  every  success  to  your  cause,  I  remain 

Yours  sincerely, 

V.  R.  Shinde. 


Midnapur,  Bengal,  India. 

To  the  Members  of  the  International  Congress  of  Liberal  Thinkers  and 
Workers  assembled  in  Boston,  Greeting.  Brethren,  may  blessings  of  the  good 
Father  rest  upon  you  and  your  Congress,  is  the  prayer  of 

J.  C.  Ganguli. 

Shillong,  Khasi  Hills,  India. 

I  have  much  pleasure  in  communicating  to  you  the  following  resolution  of  the 
Khasi  Hills  Unitarian  Union  passed  at  its  twentieth  annual  meeting  on  the  1st 
of  April,  1907 :  — 

That  this  meeting  respectfully  sends  its  greetings  and  sense  of  gratitude  to 
the  forthcoming  meetings  of  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other 
Liberal  Religious  Thinkers  and  Workers  at  Boston,  U.S.A. 
Yours  respectfully, 

Kynjro  Singh, 
Secretary  Khasi  Hills  Unitarian  Union. 

Valparaiso,  Chile. 

It  is  only  natural  that  one  of  Puritan  extraction,  living  in  a  South  American 
Republic,  should,  by  virtue  of  circumstances,  be  compelled  to  ask  for  generous 
treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  people  among  whom  he  resides,  so  that  he  may  be 
free  to  follow  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience  and  to  worship  God  according 
to  the  teaching  and  custom  of  godly  parents  or  the  promptings  of  the  divine 
indwelling  spirit.  And  what  we  desire  for  ourselves  we  should  certainly  be 
willing  and  anxious  to  see  granted  to  all  men.  Naturally,  therefore,  anything 
which  you  can  do  to  scatter  the  seed  of  liberal  thought  or  quicken  the  growth 
of  liberal  ideals  has  my  hearty  sympathy  and  approval. 

I  received  your  kind  invitation  to  attend  the  International  Congress  of 
Religious  Liberals,  but  am,  of  course,  too  far  away  to  attend,  but  enclose  my 
membership  fee,  and  by  way  of  greeting  enclose  some  lines  which  I  had  written 
the  very  morning  of  the  day  which  brought  your  letter.  If  you  feel  that  the 
lines  have  in  them  a  real  uplift  and  that  they  in  any  way  voice  the  spirit  of  what 
you  purpose,  you  are  free  to  make  such  use  of  them  as  you  choose.  Love  of 
nature,  joy  in  life,  a  striving  to  voice  the  appeal  of  the  beautiful  and  earnest 
yearning  after  the  Divine  One,  our  Father,  are  the  same  the  world  over. 

With  cordial  greetings,  Sincerely  yours, 

John  Trumbull. 


647 

National  Library,  Lima. 

I  am  more  than  grateful  to  the  Sefiorita  Carolina  Huidobro  for  the  oppor- 
tunity which  she  has  given  me  to  present  to  you  the  homage  of  my  sincere  appre- 
ciation and  consideration. 

The  high-minded,  noble,  and  precious  aspirations  which  sensitize  a  liberal 
creed  have  always  been  the  ones  which  have  dominated  my  own  spirit,  and 
believe  me,  were  it  not  for  my  failing  health,  together  with  my  advanced  age, 
nothing  would  have  stood  in  the  way  of  having  the  great  honor  of  attending  the 
coming  Congress  to  meet  in  Boston. 

With  sentiments  of  personal  consideration,  I  am  at  your  service  as  your  faith- 
ful co-religionist  and  affectionate  helper, 
[Translated.]  Ricardo  Palma. 

Pittsburg,  Penn. 

As  a  Protestant  Congregation  whose  articles  are  based  on  the  conviction  that 
the  truth,  unhampered  by  human  prepossessions,  wishes,  or  hopes,  can  alone 
yield  to  the  individual,  and  to  society  as  a  whole,  inward  and  outward  freedom, 
and  lead  to  the  development  of  life  in  an  ideal  direction,  we  rejoice  in  the  coming 
together  of  the  International  Council  of  Unitarian  and  Other  Religious  Thinkers 
and  Workers,  with  whose  objects  and  aims  we  feel  ourselves  at  one. 

We  therefore  beg  to  communicate  to  you  our  best  wishes,  and  to  ask  you  to 
receive  our  minister,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  H.  Asbeck,  as  our  representative  at  the  Con- 
gress. 

With  esteem, 

The  Standing  Committee  of  the  First 
German   United    Evangelical   Con- 
gregation    OF    DUQTJESNE     HEIGHTS, 
Pittsburg,  Penn. 
[Translated.]  By  Reinhold  Gramm,  Secretary. 


Cincinnati,  Ohio,  August  i,  1907. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  your  communication  addressed  to  me  as  president  of  the 
Central  Conference  of  American  Rabbis,  and  requesting  me  to  appoint  delegates 
to  represent  the  conference  at  the  forthcoming  Congress  of  Religious  Liberals 
to  be  held  in  Boston  in  September.  I  regret  extremely  that  your  communica- 
tion did  not  reach  me  several  weeks  sooner,  in  time  for  the  meeting  of  the  Exec- 
utive Committee  of  the  Conference,  which  took  place  on  July  10.  I  do  not  feel 
empowered  to  take  so  important  a  step  as  appointing  delegates  to  represent  the 
Congress  officially  without  the  authorization  of  the  Executive  Committee.  As 
this  committee  will  not  meet  again  till  the  middle  of  October,  no  action  can  be 
taken  upon  your  communication  in  time  for  the  Boston  meeting.  Personally, 
I  am  in  hearty  sympathy  with  the  aims  of  the  Congress,  and  I  would  take  the 
greatest  pleasure  in  attending,  were  it  at  all  possible  for  me  to  do  so. 


648 

In  answer  to  your  second  communication  requesting  a  statement  of  the  doc- 
trines of  Reform  Judaism,  I  am  sending  you  under  separate  cover  a  copy  of  my 
recently  published  book,  "The  Reform  Movement  in  Judaism."  On  pages 
488-489  you  will  find  the  Declaration  of  Principles  of  the  Philadelphia  Rabinnical 
Conference  of  1885  and  on  pages  492-510  the  resolutions  and  activities  of  the 
Central  Conference  of  American  Rabbis. 

Wishing  you  and  your  co-laborers  much  success  in  this  latest  co-operative 
effort  for  the  liberation  of  the  world's  religious  thought,  I  am 
Very  truly  yours, 

David  Philipson, 
President  of  the  Central  Conference  of 
American  Rabbis. 


649 


INDEX   OF    ILLUSTRATIONS. 


American  Unitarian  Association 

Building 

Andre\  Rev.  L.  E.  T.     . 


Berg,  Theo 

Bisbee,  Rev.  Frederick  A.  . 
Bonet-Maury,  Prof.  G.  . 
Bowie,  Rev.  W.  Copeland 
Bowring,  Sir  William  B.,  Bart 

Carpenter,  Prof.  J.  Estlin 
Crothers,  Rev.  Samuel  M. 

Davis,  Rev.  Valentine  D.  . 


Eliot,  Pres.  Charles  W. 
Eliot,  Rev.  Samuel  A. 
Eucken,  Prof.  Rudolf 


Fischer,  Rev.  Max  .  .  . 
Fleischer,  Rev.  F.  C.  .  . 
Frothingham,  Rev.  Paul  R. 

Gordon,  Rev.  George  A.   . 
Groenewegen,  Prof.  H.  Y. 
Group  of  Foreign  Delegates 
Guild,  Hon.  Curtis     .    .    . 


Hale,  Rev.  Edward  E.  . 
Hamilton,  Pres.  F.  W.  . 
Houtin,  Abbe"  A.  ... 
Howe,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward 
Hugenholtz,  Rev.  P.  H. 
Hunter,  Rev.  John      .    . 


Jones,  Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd 
Jozan,  Rev.  Nicolas    .    . 


20 
469 

4°S 
148 
469 

277 
277 

277 
117 

308 

117 

53 
372 

372 
500 
181 

148 

500 

Title 

117 

84 
212 
469 

84 
500 
308 

181 
405 


OPPOSITE 
PAGE 


Kanda,  Rev.  Saichiro 


34i 


Lindberg,  Prof.  O.  E 405 

Long,  Hon.  John  D 117 

Maddison,  Hon.  Frederick,  M.P.,  277 

Masaryk,  Prof.  Thomas  G.  .    .  405 

Mead*  Edwin  D 148 

Meyboom,  Prof.  H.  U 500 

Montet,  Prof.  Edouard  ....  436 

Pfleiderer,  Prof.  Otto     ....  372 

Rade,  Prof.  Martin 372 

Ragaz,  Rev.  Leonhard  ....  436 

Rau,  Prof.  G.  Subba      ....  341 

Reville,  Prof.  Jean 469 

Rochat,  Rev.  Ernest 436 

Schoenholzer,  Rev.  Gottfried  .  436 

Sehanavis,  B.  M 341 

Slicer,  Rev.  Thomas  R.     .    .    .  84 

South  worth,  Rev.  Franklin  G.,  181 

Street,  Rev.  Christopher  J.   .    .  308 

Strong,  Rev.  Charles 341 

Tarrant,  Rev.  William  G.     .    .  308 

von  Petzold,  Rev.  Miss  Gertrude,  181 

Washington,  Pres.  Booker  T.   .  84 

Wendte,  Rev.  Charles  W.     .    .  148 

Weston,  Rev.  J.  B 212 

Whiton,  Dr.  J.  M 212 

Wilbur,  Henry  W 212 


650 


INDEX    OF    SPEAKERS. 


PAGE 

Ames,  Rev.  Charles  G 486 

Andre,  Rev.  L.  E.  T.     200,  557,  617 

Barakatullah,  M 542 

Beach,  Rev.  Seth  C 47 

Berg,  Theodore 115 

Bisbee,  Rev.  Frederick  A.     .         464 

Bloomfield,  Meyer 572 

Bonet-Maury,  Prof.  Gaston  .  .  218, 
625,  628 
Bowie,  Rev.  W.  Copeland  .  66,  625 
Bowring,  Sir  William  B.,  Bart.,  579 
Bulkeley,  Rev.  Benjamin  R.     .      141 


Carter,  Rev.  Charles  F. 
Christie,  Prof.  F.  A.   .    . 
Cornish,  Rev.  Louis  C.  . 

Cope,  Henry  T 

Crooker,  Rev.  Joseph  H. 
Crothers,  Rev.  Samuel  M 

Davis,  Rev.  J.  Tyssul  . 
Davis,  Mrs.  R.  H.  .  .  . 
Davis,  Rev.  Valentine  D. 

Dole,  Rev.  Charles  F.    . 


Eliot,  Pres.  Charles  W.  . 
Eliot,  Rev.  Samuel  A.    . 

64, 
Eucken,  Prof.  Rudolf 


575 


Fenn,  Prof.  William  W. 
Fischer,  Rev.  Max  .  .  . 
Fleischer,  Rabbi  Charles 
Fleischer,  Rev.  F.  C.  .  . 
Frothingham,  Rev.  Paul  R 


484 
291 
606 
445 
494 
575,  593 

•  •     613 

•  •  55i 
.  .  242, 
624,  626 

•  •     521 


240,  281 

•  •      48, 
,  601,  611 

•  •     378 

•  •     309 
.  76,  629 

-    •     523 
398,  625 

•  •     325 


PAGE 

Gordon,  Rev.  George  A.    .    .    .    199, 

3°i»  358 
Groenewegen,  Prof.  Henry  Y.    .     165, 

39°.  603 
Guild,  Hon.  Curtis 576 

Hale,  Rev.  Edward  E.    .  39,  553,573 

Hamilton,  Pres.  F.  W 98 

Harris,  S 629 

Heron,  Rev.  Arthur 488 

Hinds,  Senator 569 

Holden,  Rev.  F.  W 561 

Hosmer,  Rev.  Frederick  L.   .    .       31 

Houtin,  Abbe  A 232 

Howe,  Mrs.  Julia  Ward  .  .  .  32,  570 
Hunter,  Rev.  John  .  332,  625,  626 
Hugenholtz,  Rev.  P.  H.     ...     456 

Jones,  Rev.  Jenkin  LI 469 

474.  493»  593 

Joshi,  J.  L 536 

Jozan,  Rev.  Nicolas    .    .    .    153,  555 

Kanda,  Rev.  Saichiro     .    .    525,  629 

Kelly,  Rev.  J.  A 615 

Knowlton,  Hon.  Marcus  P.  .    .     317 

Lawford,  H.  Bowring     ....     593 

Lincoln,  Hon.  F.  H 605 

Lindberg,  Prof.  O.  E.    .    .     124,  593 

Long,  Hon.  John  D 240 

Lord,  Hon.  Arthur 598 

Low,  Miss  Emma  C 546 

Maddison,  Hon.  Frederick,  M.P.,  495, 

593.  625 

Masaryk,  Prof.  Thomas  G.,  142,  563 


65i 


Meyboom,  Prof.  H.  U 587 

Montet,  Prof.  Edouard  ....     244, 

588,  626,  623 

Moore,  Prof.  George  F.     ...     378 

Morton,  Hon.  James  M.    .     524,  529 

Norman,  Rev.  A.  H 566 

Peabody,  Prof.  Francis  G.    .  272,378 
Pfleiderer,  Prof.  Otto,     255,  583,  628 

Phalen,  Rev.  Frank  A 609 

Pierce,  Rev.  Ulysses  G.      .    .    .       25 

Pope,  Rev.  Charles 617 

Puddefoot,  Rev.  W.  G 491 

Rade,  Prof.  Martin     .    .    .     100,  418 
Ragaz,  Rev.  Leonhard  .    .     502,  629 

Rau,  Prof.  G.  Subba 530 

Reville,  Prof.  Jean  .  89, 585,  619,  625 

Richmond,  Miss  Mary  E.      .    .     136, 

378,  552,  593,  625 

Rihbany,  Rev.  Abraham  M.     .     593 

Rochat,  Rev.  Ernest 173 

Roper,  Rev.  Charles 622 

Rutnam,  Prof.  S.  C.  K.     .     591,  625 


Schoenholzer,  Rev.  Gottfried,  359,  629 
Slicer,  Rev.  Thomas  R.  ...  33 
Smith,  Prof.  Goldwin  ....  139 
Southworth,  Rev.  Franklin  C.  .  442 
Street,  Rev.  Christopher  J.  .  .  368, 
624,  625 

Strong,  Rev.  Charles 130 

Summers,  Rev.  Frederick  .    .    .     624 

Tarrant,  Rev.  William  G. .    .    .    378, 
510,  625 

Van  Eyck,  Miss  Theodora  .  .  547 
Van  Ness,  Rev.  Thomas  ...  545 
Von  Petzold,  Rev.  Miss  Gertrude, 

551,  625,  629 

Washington,  Pres.  Booker  T.    .       43 

Webster,  Rev.  Alexander  .     184,  629 

Wendte,  Rev.  Charles  W.  .   .    .  1,  25, 

53.  582,  598 

Weston,  Rev.  J.  B 481 

Whiton,  Dr.  J.  M 253,  471 

Wilbur,  Henry  W 474 

Wright,  Pres.  Carroll  D.    .    .    .      274 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
THIS  EOU1YTA]yLpED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

OVERDUE. 


B&H^!9e2 


n«r&ir**~ 


LD  21-100m-12,'43  (8796s) 


! 


.  ^     m%« 


;  km  o~i 


6/6 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  £ffi 


i 


